HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Notices

Who do the Flyers protect in an expansion draft?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-03-2012, 01:06 AM
  #26
achdumeingute
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NorCal
Posts: 2,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
If the unthinkable happened, you lose someone you protected having to trade for a goaltender, because Michael Leighton is not an NHL goaltender.
I'll take 1 year of 850k for 7.5 years of 5.7m. That contract with a new lowered league is awful, unless of course they do something to reduce the salary/length of the current contract.

And I don't like Leighton at all.

achdumeingute is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2012, 01:17 AM
  #27
phillyflyer2112*
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 26
vCash: 500
giroux
.
.
.
Couturier
B Schenn
.
.
Coburn
Bryz
Hartnell
Voracek
Simmonds
.
Aging vets (Briere might be a tad above) + L Schenn
Read
.
.
THE REST

**I put Giroux 3 notches higher than the next closest because he simply cannot be replaced other than getting a top player in return..schenn and coots a good deal higher priority than the next group because we're hoping they are our future along with giroux but we can't be sure how that will pan out just yet

...coburn next because he is our most important dman at this point (since pronger is out..timonen is aging and might be done?)..bryz is next because despite his "disappointing" past season he is the first legit goalie we've had in a while and he has the ability to turn it around and be one of the better goalies in the league when he's on..hartnell..heart and soul guy with scoring ability and physical play +one of the leaders on the team..voracek we desperately want to become that top line guy who can make brilliant plays and deposit the puck in the net at some point..a lot of hope but definitely replaceable (moreso than the others). Simmonds had a very good showing last year but still has much more to show to warrant a place above everyone else. I dont believe in bowing down to someone after ONE good season.

Rest is self explanatory and less important.


Last edited by phillyflyer2112*: 12-03-2012 at 01:28 AM.
phillyflyer2112* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2012, 01:21 AM
  #28
GoneFullHextall
adios Holmgren
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 30,610
vCash: 50
I would bet my paycheck Holmgren would protect Shelley and let a valuable younger player walk away.

GoneFullHextall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2012, 01:36 AM
  #29
phillyflyer2112*
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 26
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneFullHolmgren View Post
I would bet my paycheck Holmgren would protect Shelley and let a valuable younger player walk away.



phillyflyer2112* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2012, 08:21 AM
  #30
BringBackStevens
Registered User
 
BringBackStevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 11,999
vCash: 500
Giroux, Schenn, Couturier, Voracek, Simmonds, Hartnell, Read, and Talbot are no brainers at forward
Coburn, Schenn, Grossmann no brainers on the blueline

Pronger is a no brainer to leave exposed, but no one would claim him

That leave Briere, Bryz, and IMO Mez as possibilities

Considering we are looking at a lower cap moving forward, I think I would seriously consider leaving Briere exposed. I can see the logic in not leaving Bryz exposed since he most likely would not be claimed and it would damage his fragile mind even more, but if there's any chance he's taken it would be wise to dump him.

That's 13 million off the cap if you can move those two with keeping the young core of the team in tact. Of course theres a huge hole in net and some holes on D, but those are holes we already have

BringBackStevens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2012, 08:31 AM
  #31
dats81
Registered User
 
dats81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Carinthia
Country: Austria
Posts: 2,000
vCash: 500
One more thing to consider: this is a young team that needs leadership.

From a monetary salary-cap centered point of view Briere and/or Timonen may be expendable but those two are integral pieces in the locker room and even off the ice. They can't afford losing them both.

Would existing NMC be void or would players have to actively waive them in that scenario?

dats81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2012, 10:46 AM
  #32
BillDineen
Registered User
 
BillDineen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,629
vCash: 500
For argument's sake, let's assume 2014-15 as the earliest possible expansion year.

That leaves Timonen, Meszaros and Read as UFAs prior to the expansion draft and Briere with only 1 year left on his contract. Further, Bryz would have had at least another year (assuming lockout doesn't last into next season) to either justify his contract or not. Hopefully Leighton would be long gone.

Just saying.

BillDineen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2012, 10:48 AM
  #33
Sawdalite
AbleWasIEreISawLupul
 
Sawdalite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Girouxsalem
Posts: 5,327
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dats81 View Post
One more thing to consider: this is a young team that needs leadership.

From a monetary salary-cap centered point of view Briere and/or Timonen may be expendable but those two are integral pieces in the locker room and even off the ice. They can't afford losing them both.

Would existing NMC be void or would players have to actively waive them in that scenario?
Interesting question... I personally don't have the definitive answer but would guess that 'No Move' would mean NO MOVE of any sort... as defined in the description... and since the controlling Organization does have the option and is not forced to allow them to be claimed, the Organization would be obligated to uphold the contracted agreement and protect players with a NMC. I would also guess that players with a NTC could be left off the protected list... But I'd certainly love to see the official rules on this in this fictional Expansion Draft circumstance.

But seriously... what were the rules in the past ones? Were there NMCs back then? I think that is a fairly recent clause... maybe starting with Kimmo, Briere, etc. after the last LockOut... but I certainly can be way off base on that.


EDIT PS: The point about the leadership is a good one that should not be glanced over... I agree.

Sawdalite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2012, 04:36 PM
  #34
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 109,217
vCash: 5775
Quote:
Originally Posted by achdumeingute View Post
I'll take 1 year of 850k for 7.5 years of 5.7m. That contract with a new lowered league is awful, unless of course they do something to reduce the salary/length of the current contract.

And I don't like Leighton at all.
You can get a replacement-level goaltender anywhere, this doesn't have anything to do with Leighton. That's why they're replacement-level.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2012, 05:11 PM
  #35
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 achdumeingute View Post
I'll take 1 year of 850k for 7.5 years of 5.7m. That contract with a new lowered league is awful, unless of course they do something to reduce the salary/length of the current contract.

And I don't like Leighton at all.
Yeah, but we're talking Michael Leighton. It would be dirty and wrong to protect Leighton in an expansion draft.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2012, 06:48 PM
  #36
achdumeingute
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NorCal
Posts: 2,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
You can get a replacement-level goaltender anywhere, this doesn't have anything to do with Leighton. That's why they're replacement-level.
Except we already have Leighton signed for this year. Again, I can live with it in the short term. Now, if we are talking for next year...well then sure, yes get someone else.

I was just running with ML since he is already here.

achdumeingute is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2012, 06:49 PM
  #37
achdumeingute
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NorCal
Posts: 2,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haute Couturier View Post
Yeah, but we're talking Michael Leighton. It would be dirty and wrong to protect Leighton in an expansion draft.
I wouldn't protect Leighton. It's about not protecting Bryz and who takes over. I'm fine with Leighton in the short term for 850k salary.

And I can't stand him.

achdumeingute is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2012, 06:52 PM
  #38
achdumeingute
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NorCal
Posts: 2,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dats81 View Post
One more thing to consider: this is a young team that needs leadership.

From a monetary salary-cap centered point of view Briere and/or Timonen may be expendable but those two are integral pieces in the locker room and even off the ice. They can't afford losing them both.

Would existing NMC be void or would players have to actively waive them in that scenario?
I think Giroux and Hartnell provide enough leadership.

Timonen is not expendable. And at this point I'll sign him to 1 year 6m deals for the forseeable future.

Briere on the other hand floats around and overall is a negative on the ice...all for the highest salary on the team. I really don't want his "leadership".

achdumeingute is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:40 PM
  #39
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 109,217
vCash: 5775
Quote:
Originally Posted by achdumeingute View Post
Except we already have Leighton signed for this year. Again, I can live with it in the short term. Now, if we are talking for next year...well then sure, yes get someone else.

I was just running with ML since he is already here.
As long as it's not starting goaltender.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2012, 06:13 PM
  #40
WhiskeyBoarder
Flyers West HQ
 
WhiskeyBoarder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dats81 View Post
One more thing to consider: this is a young team that needs leadership.
Not that I totally disagree, but its my opinion that if Laviolette is doing his job, players shouldn't be needed to fill the role.

PS: I think Laviolette does a fine job.

WhiskeyBoarder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2012, 06:24 PM
  #41
MsWoof
Registered User
 
MsWoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,802
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeyBoarder View Post
Not that I totally disagree, but its my opinion that if Laviolette is doing his job, players shouldn't be needed to fill the role.

PS: I think Laviolette does a fine job.
I disagree, you always need some players to be leaders. A coach is a coach first but a player who is a leader is there with the younger guys and is a necessity. A coach is quite often going to be the bad guy as he's the one who will bench a player where a player who's a leader can be a bit of a buffer between the players and the coach.

MsWoof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 12:04 AM
  #42
Sawdalite
AbleWasIEreISawLupul
 
Sawdalite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Girouxsalem
Posts: 5,327
vCash: 500
Veteran leadership can also be displayed in ways such as having a young player come into a home and family situation at times while they are away from their own, and socialize with them... or even house them as veteran Briere did with Giroux and then again with Couturier... Making new players feel welcome... reaching out to UFAs they have played with or befriended and selling the Organization and Area and trying to get them to sign with the team.

Veterans like said in an earlier post can be a buffer... Look at Primeau and Hitchcock... he would carry things back and forth and relate matters, and state cases -- both sides -- not always captains... but always leaders and almost always, if not always, seasoned veterans... Leaders at times take bullets for the other players versus from management, or takes them from teammates to cushion the anger against the management.

Young teams have to have some advanced strong players when they lack veterans on the roster... and even then they will lack the experience from NHL Seasons and PostSeasons... veterans who played long into the PlayOffs or even won Cups... veterans who tell young players what to expect and what they need to do... and not do.

Briere and Kimmo are leaders that earn their salaries through more than their on-ice play as I see it... There are others such as Hartnell, Coburn, Talbot, etal, but IMO the more the merrier mixed in with young talent and young legs.

Sawdalite 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 12:27 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.