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

Oct. 3: Scott Laughton back to juniors; Oct. 23: Kris Newbury sent to Phantoms (AHL)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-03-2013, 11:33 AM
  #26
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,833
vCash: 500
Beyond ****ing stupid. No ****ing point to this. Newbury and Rosehill are worthless. Bring up ****ing Akeson or Raffl, not a ******* of a goon.

SolidSnakeUS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 11:33 AM
  #27
GoneFullHextall
adios Holmgren
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 31,615
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
Thank God we didn't sign Gagne, how else could we watch Newbury if we had?


I guess this means Talbot stays on the 3rd line. Don't look for any offense on that front.
dont worry Holmgren knows more about hockey then everyone here combined times 10. He knows what hes doing.

GoneFullHextall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 11:37 AM
  #28
flyershockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,881
vCash: 50
There has to be a trade coming, right? I just can't imagine they're comfortable rolling with this personnel in the bottom six outside of Couturier and Schenn/Read.

flyershockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 11:39 AM
  #29
bennysflyers16
Registered User
 
bennysflyers16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 16,866
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneFullHolmgren View Post
dont worry Holmgren knows more about hockey then everyone here combined times 10. He knows what hes doing.
I know it is taboo to say, but I think Gagne isn't here because of Hexy input.

bennysflyers16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 11:40 AM
  #30
MP92
Ginger Jesus
 
MP92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidSnakeUS View Post
Beyond ****ing stupid. No ****ing point to this. Newbury and Rosehill are worthless. Bring up ****ing Akeson or Raffl, not a ******* of a goon.
I'd like to see them bring up Ben Holmstrom. He could be used on the pk and bottom six. He'd be better than Newbury. Akeson isn't cut out for bottom six duties either.

MP92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 11:41 AM
  #31
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 38,165
vCash: 156
I don't understand why we couldn't keep Laughton up for the 9 games. It would have done, by my estimation, 0 harm.

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
Beef Invictus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 11:43 AM
  #32
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,578
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Wow, this is pretty surprising (both in the fact that they sent back Laughton and that they called up Newbury).

If they had planned to send Laughton back to Juniors...why didn't they sign a third liner (Gagne or otherwise)? Bonehead move right here.

DrinkFightFlyers is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 11:44 AM
  #33
bennysflyers16
Registered User
 
bennysflyers16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 16,866
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
I don't understand why we couldn't keep Laughton up for the 9 games. It would have done, by my estimation, 0 harm.
Cause I think Lavy has zero interest in playing him. I thought vs the smurf Habs he would for sure get the nod, instead they recall another no talent scrub over a player with any talent.

bennysflyers16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 11:46 AM
  #34
MP92
Ginger Jesus
 
MP92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,517
vCash: 500
Im thinking Homer feels Scott is ready for the NHL but figured there is no point in having him here if Lavi won't play him. Question is, shouldn't Homer be able to override Lavi and make him play him? GM>coach

MP92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 11:47 AM
  #35
Larry44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,145
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Wow, this is pretty surprising (both in the fact that they sent back Laughton and that they called up Newbury).

If they had planned to send Laughton back to Juniors...why didn't they sign a third liner (Gagne or otherwise)? Bonehead move right here.
I don't think they planned it. I think they realized last night that this season is already lost and hopeless, so they don't want Laughton exposed to the stink.

Larry44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 11:50 AM
  #36
GoneFullHextall
adios Holmgren
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 31,615
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
I don't understand why we couldn't keep Laughton up for the 9 games. It would have done, by my estimation, 0 harm.
yep I dont get it and by judging by the timing if Jake wasnt a question mark last night that Laughton would have been sent back before today.
Look i understand if they feel Laughton isnt ready. IMO they probably knew they were going to do this for a couple of weeks anyway. Why didnt they bring in someone else?
Kris Newbury? really?

GoneFullHextall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 11:50 AM
  #37
BillDineen
Registered User
 
BillDineen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,683
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bennysflyers16 View Post
I know it is taboo to say, but I think Gagne isn't here because of Hexy input.
I agree. Gagne said he was more interested in hockey again playing with the Flyers and not in a lesser role as he did with the Kings. I think Hextall did not like his attitude.

BillDineen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 11:53 AM
  #38
GoneFullHextall
adios Holmgren
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 31,615
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bennysflyers16 View Post
I know it is taboo to say, but I think Gagne isn't here because of Hexy input.
it wouldnt shock me if this was true.
I mentioned a little while ago that I dont mind if they stayed away from Gagne(as much as I love the guy) and stuck with the youth.
But judging by how the roster has been assembled the last couple of weeks it makes the decision even more baffling. Jay Rosehill? Kris Newbury?

GoneFullHextall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 11:56 AM
  #39
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,578
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
I don't think they planned it. I think they realized last night that this season is already lost and hopeless, so they don't want Laughton exposed to the stink.
Haha, you're not serious, right? A game that but for a hot goalie in net for Toronto would have been a win for this team is a sign that this season is already lost and hopeless? What if they win on Saturday...does that mean they are Cup contenders? It was one game. Come on.

DrinkFightFlyers is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 11:59 AM
  #40
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 38,165
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Haha, you're not serious, right? A game that but for a hot goalie in net for Toronto would have been a win for this team is a sign that this season is already lost and hopeless? What if they win on Saturday...does that mean they are Cup contenders? It was one game. Come on.
One game of 49 now where the same **** is on display. The problems last night ran deeper than Bernier.

Beef Invictus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 12:00 PM
  #41
CanadianFlyer88
Moderator
Knublin' PPs
 
CanadianFlyer88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Van City
Posts: 14,096
vCash: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
I don't understand why we couldn't keep Laughton up for the 9 games. It would have done, by my estimation, 0 harm.
Possible pending trade or signing? Sending Laughton down now frees up his cap hit, if anything.

__________________
I deride your truth handling abilities
CanadianFlyer88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 12:01 PM
  #42
BillDineen
Registered User
 
BillDineen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,683
vCash: 500
I would honestly rather see Gus play wing on the fourth line rather than Newbury.

BillDineen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 12:04 PM
  #43
CanadianFlyer88
Moderator
Knublin' PPs
 
CanadianFlyer88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Van City
Posts: 14,096
vCash: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
One game of 49 now where the same **** is on display. The problems last night ran deeper than Bernier.
Really?

The Flyers controlled the play 5-on-5, they forced the Leafs into giving the Flyers 7 powerplays, the defense actually looked competent as a group, they actually looked like they knew how to exit their own zone (for the first time in years), there was only one shift I can recall that the Leafs had theFlyers pinned in their own zone for more than 15 seconds... there were a lot of positives around the 'team' game last night and very few negatives.

The only team problem I saw last night was a lack of finish. There were individuals who looked poor, but that was as strong a team game as you'll see from the Flyers this year. Bury chances, win the game; fail to capitalize on chances, easy loss.

CanadianFlyer88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 12:06 PM
  #44
Curufinwe
Registered User
 
Curufinwe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 7,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CS View Post
I'm totally okay with Laughton spending more time in juniors.

That said, I wish one of our potential top 9 forwards, mostly McGinn, could separate himself from the heard and earn an NHL top 9 role. That way Talbot could go back to the 4th line. Then we could finally end this charade.
McGinn's fight last year was very costly to him and the team.

Curufinwe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 12:08 PM
  #45
Tripod
Registered User
 
Tripod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 8,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brewcrew8 View Post
Hmmm from what I heard it doesn't sound like he has anything more to prove in juniors. So what if he only gets fourth line minutes, give the kid NHL experience. He brought some good energy last year I thought.
This is what I don't get....why do people think this????

Laughton was the #2 C on Oshawa last year with Boone Jenner being #1. We label Laughton a 3rd line C who "has nothing to prove in Jr." Maybe, just maybe he develops more offensive upside in Jr and then REALLY earns a spot on the Flyers.

Jenner was a 2nd rd pick...Laughton a 1st
Jenner had a 1.14 PPG in his 3rd year...Laughton had 1.14 in his 3rd year
Jenner was sent back for a 4th year...Laughton has now been sent back
Jenner EARNED the #1C job at training camp this year...Laughton next year....???

Maybe, just maybe, we should allow the kids to grow more physically and offensively by sending them back for an extra year. You never know, you might actually get a better hockey player because of it. Not many players development has been hurt by going back to Jr.

And guess what, if all he is going to be is a 3rd liner then what is the rush? There are many 3rd liners available every year. We need to make these kids EARN their roster spot, not just give it to them. Look at Boston, LA and Chicago as examples.

Tripod is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 12:12 PM
  #46
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 38,165
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianFlyer88 View Post
Really?

The Flyers controlled the play 5-on-5, they forced the Leafs into giving the Flyers 7 powerplays, the defense actually looked competent as a group, they actually looked like they knew how to exit their own zone (for the first time in years), there was only one shift I can recall that the Leafs had theFlyers pinned in their own zone for more than 15 seconds... there were a lot of positives around the 'team' game last night and very few negatives.

The only team problem I saw last night was a lack of finish. There were individuals who looked poor, but that was as strong a team game as you'll see from the Flyers this year. Bury chances, win the game; fail to capitalize on chances, easy loss.
They controlled play in the first period. Then as the game went on the Leafs shut the Flyers down more and more, and the Flyers had no answers. Looked like more of the same to me.

Beef Invictus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 12:15 PM
  #47
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,578
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
One game of 49 now where the same **** is on display. The problems last night ran deeper than Bernier.
Disagree. Maybe your Leighton diagram would be of use here? Bernier being the biggest part, the rest being the smaller part? Other than the poor Power Play showing, there really wasn't much going on last night besides Bernier's performance that stuck out as a reason that the Flyers lost. And surely a poor power isn't the same **** that was on display last year since the power play was pretty damned good last year. The rest of the game wasn't perfection by any means for the Flyers, but it certainly didn't look to me like there was some glaring issue that the Flyers will not be able to overcome. If Bernier didn't stand on his head most of the game, I predict the outcome would have been different. Kind of like how if Leighton wouldn't have played so poorly in the SCF, the Flyers would have won, right? Or does it not work that way if I am saying it?

DrinkFightFlyers is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 12:18 PM
  #48
GoneFullHextall
adios Holmgren
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 31,615
vCash: 50
lirl@ bringing in Leighton into the discussion.

brilliant.

GoneFullHextall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 12:20 PM
  #49
GoneFullHextall
adios Holmgren
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 31,615
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianFlyer88 View Post
Really?

The Flyers controlled the play 5-on-5.
how many SOG did the Flyers have 5 on 5 last night?

GoneFullHextall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2013, 12:20 PM
  #50
YuioIklo
Registered User
 
YuioIklo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Quebec
Country: Martinique
Posts: 1,425
vCash: 100
Why not McGinn?

YuioIklo 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 10:43 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.