Value of: Scott Laughton rental

[Strawberry Fields]

Solid third liner, plays center and lw, can chip in offense, above average defensively. Not afraid to engage physically. He's a ufa this summer and with the Flyers' playoff hopes looking slim I'm sure he'll garner some interest from contenders. What would you be willing to offer?

Click to read more...

 

[Maurice of Orange]

Solid third liner who can play all three forward positions, chip in offense, above average defensively. Not afraid to engage physically. He's a ufa this summer and with the Flyers' playoff hopes looking slim I'm sure he'll garner some interest from contenders. What would you be willing to offer?

Never seen Lootin as a RW.

Lootin’s best position is as a forechecking LW but is decent as a defensive 4C.

 

[belair]

What are Philly's positional needs next season? If there's a prospect or two in consideration for the return, what roles are potentially open?

 

[Starat327]

What are Philly's positional needs next season? If there's a prospect or two in consideration for the return, what roles are potentially open?

RHD

 

[Flukeshot]

What are Philly's positional needs next season? If there's a prospect or two in consideration for the return, what roles are potentially open?

Personally I think anything but D. Must be expansion exempt.

 

[CatchyTune]

i'll give ya a 2nd and you'll like it

 

[TheKingPin]

i'll give ya a 2nd and you'll like it

1st if Philly retains? That’s probably the best case.

 

[CatchyTune]

1st if Philly retains? That’s probably the best case.

doubt he garners a 1st. he is already affordable at his 100% cap hit, so retaining isnt a must.

 

[BrindamoursNose]

doubt he garners a 1st. he is already affordable at his 100% cap hit, so retaining isnt a must.

2nd with conditions to be a 1st and then maybe we'll be there

 

[Starat327]

doubt he garners a 1st. he is already affordable at his 100% cap hit, so retaining isnt a must.

All it takes is one crazy GM who thinks this is their year. I'd have never thought Goodrow would get a first (granted, another contracted year), but it happened.

Id probably settle for a 2nd when it comes down to it, but I don't think the Leafs 2nd is a "too good to not tske" kinda deal either. I imagine the Leafs 2nd will be very late into the 50s, so ita not knocking my socks off.

 

[ownal]

Would you take Friedman back for Laughton?

 

[BrindamoursNose]

Yeh... I am no Laughton acolyte.

But he has now scored at 2nd line level at 5v5 over 247 games. (0.74 G/60 and 1.74 P/60.)

With above average defensive stats.

And he can play all three positions and PK.

Trust the Appleyard. Laughton may be the best piece a team could pickup this deadline.

Would you take Friedman back for Laughton?

Considering we gave him away for free...No, I would not say that would be adequate compensation.

 

[CatchyTune]

2nd with conditions to be a 1st and then maybe we'll be there

theres really no good scenario where we trade a 1st rounder for Scott Laughton. him as a rental doesnt warrant one either.

All it takes is one crazy GM who thinks this is their year. I'd have never thought Goodrow would get a first (granted, another contracted year), but it happened.

Id probably settle for a 2nd when it comes down to it, but I don't think the Leafs 2nd is a "too good to not tske" kinda deal either. I imagine the Leafs 2nd will be very late into the 50s, so ita not knocking my socks off.

Its never a good idea to use the Goodrow trade as a comparable. sets expectations too high. cap strapped team overpayed for a 4th liner making nearly league minimum for 2 years. if they hadnt won the cup we'd all be saying it was a terrible deal.

im sure if Laughton goes on the market there would be a few 2nds to shuffle through. might be small adds on top of them to tip the scales.

 

[Starat327]

theres really no good scenario where we trade a 1st rounder for Scott Laughton. him as a rental doesnt warrant one either.


Its never a good idea to use the Goodrow trade as a comparable. sets expectations too high. cap strapped team overpayed for a 4th liner making nearly league minimum for 2 years. if they hadnt won the cup we'd all be saying it was a terrible deal.

im sure if Laughton goes on the market there would be a few 2nds to shuffle through. might be small adds on top of them to tip the scales.

To be clear, I wouldn't pay a first for him. I'm just saying that's its not unlike GMs to do dumb things. Goodrow was not the first bottom 6 player to return a first (Gautsad, anyone?) and I doubt he'll be the last. GMs make headscratching moves year after year.

 

[Tripod]

doubt he garners a 1st. he is already affordable at his 100% cap hit, so retaining isnt a must.

It's not a must. But retaining 50% allows the acquiring team more money to make more moves so there is a big benefit. His cap hit becomes almost replacement level.

But I think in the end, it will be for a 2nd+....and the + could determine where he goes.

 

[CatchyTune]

To be clear, I wouldn't pay a first for him. I'm just saying that's its not unlike GMs to do dumb things. Goodrow was not the first bottom 6 player to return a first (Gautsad, anyone?) and I doubt he'll be the last. GMs make headscratching moves year after year.

yeah it would take a dumb move. i wouldnt group in Laughton with Goodrow just because they are bottom 6 players. the last rental to get a 1st was Taylor Hall last year, and this year he might not even get one lol. someone like Kapanen got a 1st+ because he had term (and RFA status). teams will pay for control, i doubt we see 1sts for rentals anymore unless its a Hall level player.

It's not a must. But retaining 50% allows the acquiring team more money to make more moves so there is a big benefit. His cap hit becomes almost replacement level.

But I think in the end, it will be for a 2nd+....and the + could determine where he goes.

yeah a 2nd plus, and whatever pick/prospect is the + that Philly likes best will be the deal accepted.

 

[Starat327]

yeah it would take a dumb move. i wouldnt group in Laughton with Goodrow just because they are bottom 6 players. the last rental to get a 1st was Taylor Hall last year, and this year he might not even get one lol. someone like Kapanen got a 1st+ because he had term (and RFA status). teams will pay for control, i doubt we see 1sts for rentals anymore unless its a Hall level player.



yeah a 2nd plus, and whatever pick/prospect is the + that Philly likes best will be the deal accepted.

I dont think it will happen, and im not even saying it's probable. But would I be surprised if it did? Not really. There's a lot if different factors that go into it, including this year. Some teams may feel they're in a better spot because the rest of their division is garbage. Some teams may not value a presumed late first because this year draft class didn't have the playing time to be scouted or develop correctly (I disagree, just throwing out ideas).

Taylor Hall not getting a first doesn't surprise me. Buffalo's a garbage team but the dude shows no compete.

 

[BrindamoursNose]

theres really no good scenario where we trade a 1st rounder for Scott Laughton. him as a rental doesnt warrant one either.


Its never a good idea to use the Goodrow trade as a comparable. sets expectations too high. cap strapped team overpayed for a 4th liner making nearly league minimum for 2 years. if they hadnt won the cup we'd all be saying it was a terrible deal.

im sure if Laughton goes on the market there would be a few 2nds to shuffle through. might be small adds on top of them to tip the scales.

Then you may not get him. Laughton's been scoring at a 2nd line rate for the past few seasons and he can move up and down the lineup.

Another team may pay for a guy so cheap and so valuable, even if Toronto doesn't.

 

[CatchyTune]

I dont think it will happen, and im not even saying it's probable. But would I be surprised if it did? Not really. There's a lot if different factors that go into it, including this year. Some teams may feel they're in a better spot because the rest of their division is garbage. Some teams may not value a presumed late first because this year draft class didn't have the playing time to be scouted or develop correctly (I disagree, just throwing out ideas).

Taylor Hall not getting a first doesn't surprise me. Buffalo's a garbage team but the dude shows no compete.

yeah as weird as it may sound, i would probably rather acquire Laughton over Hall even if its similar cost. i would love Laughton on our 3rd line.

Then you may not get him. Laughton's been scoring at a 2nd line rate for the past few seasons and he can move up and down the lineup.

Another team may pay for a guy so cheap and so valuable, even if Toronto doesn't.

uhhh... i disagree with that. sure he played to a 45 point pace last year, but even thats low end 2nd line production. this year 42 in a 82 game season. before that, hadnt topped 32 points.

im fine with not getting him if the demand is a 1st. teams can have a max offer, that they wont surpass value wise. that should be less than a 1st.

 

[Starat327]

yeah as weird as it may sound, i would probably rather acquire Laughton over Hall even if its similar cost. i would love Laughton on our 3rd line.


uhhh... i disagree with that. sure he played to a 45 point pace last year, but even thats low end 2nd line production. this year 42 in a 82 game season. before that, hadnt topped 32 points.

im fine with not getting him if the demand is a 1st. teams can have a max offer, that they wont surpass value wise. that should be less than a 1st.

The thing to look at is that all (or most) of his points are at ES. It's not as though he's feasting on PP points.

Again, not saying that he's guaranteed a first, but a 40 ES point bottom 6 player shouldn't come cheap, either.

 

[Tripod]

And yet, as hard as it is to believe, Laughton last year and this year, produced more than Hall did at ES last year before he was traded. But for sure with Hall you get his name...and his PP scoring. Laughton you get the PKing ability.

Him being able to be a #3C or play at LW in the top 6 and be a PKer will hopefully get a few teams to big higher than I expect. Maybe a team wanting to sign him steps up.

Last year:
Another player I heard a lot of teams liked: Philadelphia’s Scott Laughton.
'Chuck (Fletcher) couldn’t hang up fast enough,' another exec joked.

This year:
There are a lot of teams out there if you told them that Scott Laughton was available for a playoff run, they're throwing themselves at a guy like him," Sportsnet's Elliotte Friedman said on a Flyers-focused 31 Thoughts podcast published Friday.

 

[CatchyTune]

The thing to look at is that all (or most) of his points are at ES. It's not as though he's feasting on PP points.

Again, not saying that he's guaranteed a first, but a 40 ES point bottom 6 player shouldn't come cheap, either.

yeah and if he had term, say 2 more years at that cap hit i would trade a 1st for him in a heartbeat. i know the player he is, it just comes down to value and term.

 

[Flyer lurker]

To be clear, I wouldn't pay a first for him. I'm just saying that's its not unlike GMs to do dumb things. Goodrow was not the first bottom 6 player to return a first (Gautsad, anyone?) and I doubt he'll be the last. GMs make headscratching moves year after year.

Goodrow had another year and is not best comparison.

Now Toffoli got a 2 and Madden and that feels closer. Its a high price but adding only 2.3m in salary (less if retention) will greatly add to his value.

 

[Tripod]

oh yeah...here is what Friedman said just a few days ago on his podcast:

Talked about Laughton, thinks the market is higher than it was for Goodrow last year, but Laughton loves being a Flyer and the Flyers know that and they’ve been trying to get a deal. Laughton was in around Laine trade talks.

 

[belair]

Personally I think anything but D. Must be expansion exempt.

I think you guys are going to lose something valuable in expansion already. I wouldn't be worried about losing anything you potentially acquire for Laughton.

Tyler Benson and Caleb Jones are two guys Edmonton might have available to move in a deal for a rental.