Speculation: Flyers in the market for a vet top 4 d-man?

2Pair

Registered User
Oct 8, 2017
12,633
5,103
Sorry, should have clarified. A UFA at the end of this season, because of the coming expansion draft in June, would probably make most sense. They need to be able to protect their young d core (Provy, Sanheim, Myers) and the dman in question would likely be lost in the draft regardless.
What needs to be added to Ian Cole to get Laughton?
 

Fight4yourRight

“Chuck’s my guy”
Dec 18, 2017
3,628
7,757
Stranger things have happened so to totally count Niskanen out when he’s still technically under contract is shortsighted on your part, but I understand your probably younger and haven’t been watching the game as long as other posters on here.

Lol. 32 is younger eh? Quit flaming. You’re bad at it.
 

WhatTheDuck

9 - 20 - 8
May 17, 2007
23,169
15,685
Worst Case, Ontario
of course...depending on the cost

The ED this offseason really does hinder what the Flyers could do this year but they still should 100% be talking to teams to see what is a possibility.

Just out of curiosity, is the 4+4 protected list a possibility if the Flyers did add another notable Dman? Who would be the best forward(s) left off in that scenario?
 

ponder719

Haute Couturier
Jul 2, 2013
6,484
8,439
Philadelphia, PA
Just out of curiosity, is the 4+4 protected list a possibility if the Flyers did add another notable Dman? Who would be the best forward(s) left off in that scenario?

If we protect Provorov/Sanheim/Myers/4D, we're obligated to protect Giroux and Hayes due to NMCs, Couturier and Konecny are the next 2 obvious protection slots, that leaves us exposing Lindblom/Patrick/Voracek/JVR/Laughton and anyone else beyond that.

Frost and Farabee are exempt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BernieParent

Tripod

I hate this team
Aug 12, 2008
78,816
86,163
Nova Scotia
Just out of curiosity, is the 4+4 protected list a possibility if the Flyers did add another notable Dman? Who would be the best forward(s) left off in that scenario?
unfortunately 4-4 is not an option

Giroux NMC
Hayes NMC
Couturier
Konecny
Patrick
Lindblom
likely Voracek

If the Flyers went 4-4...then they lose Lindblom, Patrick or Voracek. So the cost of losing them added to the cost of adding that better Dman would be too much.

Flyers are just in that bad spot of not being able to go after a really good Dman due to expansion....but also have Zamula and York who could be here next year.

So adding a cheaper stopgap this year fits....with next offseason after the ED looking to possiby add that better RHD if we could add one. One that is good defensively...we have enough offense on the backend in the system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flyer lurker

Tripod

I hate this team
Aug 12, 2008
78,816
86,163
Nova Scotia
I would think that Voracek wouldnt be protected with that contract.
He is over a PPG his year
He was on a 67 point pace last year
He was on a 69 point pace 2 years ago

I know people hate 30+ year old players on bigger contracts, but he is still a top 10 RW in the game. And if we didn't protect him, then next one up that needs protecting is Aube-Kubel. Not exposing a 65+ point 1st liner to protect a 30 point 4th liner with 3rd line upside.

JVR will be exposed however.
 

TheKingPin

Registered User
Nov 16, 2005
20,633
10,092
Philadelphia, PA
It would have to be a one year remaining player. Expansion precludes something longer and after next year they could have younger good players ready to complete the D.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad