2024-25 Roster Thread #1: The Beginninging

[BringBackHakstol]

Jett "Luca Sbisa" Luchanko

 

[freakydallas13]

Jett "Luca Sbisa" Luchanko

Lucett Sbischanko

 

[deadhead]

Couts might be a good example, yes, he was a dominant scorer in junior hockey, but not in the NHL for a few years. But he was so good defensively, and could play multiple roles, that he was a valuable player from the get go.

77g 27 points, 14:08
46g 15 points, 15:53
82g 39 points, 19:05
82g 37 points, 18:33
He didn't break out offensively until he was 25.

Some was how he was used, but some I think was adjusting to the NHL, Couts has always been limited as a skater so he had to learn how to compensate as a NHL center. Defense came easier.

 

[Hextallent63]

They are a bottom 10 team regardless of how well Ersson plays. Could be even worse if Ersson completely shits the bed if he can't handle the load of a #1 because I don't see Fedotov or Kolosov taking over

I don't know if I agree with you here as far as Ersson's level of play and it's importance to the success of the hockey team. He was a big part of the reason why the flyers flatlined at the end of the season. If he maintained any supplements of his best play during the season in the last quarter of the season they'd have been in the playoffs. I'm hoping during the offseason he did some kind of training that would help with his endurance over the course of the full season.

 

[freakydallas13]

Couts might be a good example, yes, he was a dominant scorer in junior hockey, but not in the NHL for a few years. But he was so good defensively, and could play multiple roles, that he was a valuable player from the get go.

77g 27 points, 14:08
46g 15 points, 15:53
82g 39 points, 19:05
82g 37 points, 18:33
He didn't break out offensively until he was 25.

Some was how he was used, but some I think was adjusting to the NHL, Couts has always been limited as a skater so he had to learn how to compensate as a NHL center. Defense came easier.

Yes, truly the Luchanko comparables are Sean Couturier and Rod Brindamor. Those are who I see when I see Jett play.

Remind me again who accused who of over hyping prospects?

 

[Magua]

Couturier led the Q in points in his D-1 year.

In his draft year, Luchanko was 30th in the OHL.

Both going straight to the NHL!

 

[deadhead]

I don't know if I agree with you here as far as Ersson's level of play and it's importance to the success of the hockey team. He was a big part of the reason why the flyers flatlined at the end of the season. If he maintained any supplements of his best play during the season in the last quarter of the season they'd have been in the playoffs. I'm hoping during the offseason he did some kind of training that would help with his endurance over the course of the full season.

I think it's more a matter of Fedotov (or Kolosov) being better than Peterson/Sandstrom.
Not a high threshold.
Ersson should be fine if he's limited to 50 games or so, 60+ is a load few goalies can handle.

 

[Hextallent63]

Flyers were top ten in 5x5 metrics last year, as well as PK.
Goaltending and PP cost them a playoff spot.
Goaltending probably can't get worse (it was bottom 5), and Michkov will help the PP.
The only players gone are Atkinson and Walker, and metrics were as good after trading Walker and half the defense injured.

So they have as much of a shot at a PO spot as bottom ten.

Comes down to goalies, young players improving, and Couts, Drysdale and Risto staying healthy.
Risto looked very good in camp, Drysdale still a work in progress.
Couts is probably the "joker," great metrics last season (as always) but couldn't create offense.

I have to keep telling myself Drysdale is still only 22, he didn't impress me in camp and to be totally honest I don't think he looked like he was all that elite-fast either.

 

[freakydallas13]

Couturier led the Q in points in his D-1 year.

Couts was in the conversation to be 1OA before he got mono, just like Jett "we know better" Luchanko would have gone, if not for 12 other teams foolishly passing on him.

 

[deadhead]

Couturier led the Q in points in his D-1 year.

Think I pointed that out, no?

However, Couts was primarily a defense first center in the NHL, his CHL scoring didn't translate, probably due to his skating. But defense bought him time to adjust to the NHL.

Couts probably would have emerged faster if he was moved to the wing, though he was never as good a shooter as say Mark Stone. Wing would have made his lack of speed less of an issue, but he was too good of a defensive center (and the Flyers too thin at center).

 

[JojoTheWhale]

Couturier was a top prospect in his class who was an absolute monster in his D-1, got mono in his draft year, and still put up ~1.66 PPG on a team with exactly one other good Forward. Luchanko was *wop hand gestures* good. More or less. I think there are indicators that he could be a good pick. I'd just like to see him have the time to develop himself.

We can keep trying this, but the list of modern comparables is Sillinger and you can argue about Zach Benson (1.63 PPG). That's the list.

Luchanko was at 1.08. I don't know why we still have to do this, but it's Friday deck time and my wife is out. I've got time.

 

[Hextallent63]

I think it's more a matter of Fedotov (or Kolosov) being better than Peterson/Sandstrom.
Not a high threshold.
Ersson should be fine if he's limited to 50 games or so, 60+ is a load few goalies can handle.

Yeah I agree with you here although I don't like putting too much reason into a goaltenders performance based on other goalies performances. I just hope he doesn't wear down.

Couturier was a top prospect in his class who was an absolute monster in his D-1, got mono in his draft year, and still put up ~1.66 PPG on a team with exactly one other good Forward. Luchanko was *wop hand gestures* good. More or less. I think there are indicators that he could be a good pick. I'd just like to see him have the time to develop himself.

We can keep trying this, but the list of modern comparables is Sillinger and you can argue about Zach Benson (1.63 PPG). That's the list.

Luchanko was at 1.08. I don't know why we still have to do this, but it's Friday deck time and my wife is out. I've got time.

Is it fair to judge luchenko to judge him on his junior stats when he was 17 his last season?

 

[deadhead]

Couturier was a top prospect in his class who was an absolute monster in his D-1, got mono in his draft year, and still put up ~1.66 PPG on a team with exactly one other good Forward. Luchanko was *wop hand gestures* good. More or less.

We can keep trying this, but the list of modern comparables is Sillinger and you can argue about Zach Benson. That's the list.

Luchanko was at 1.08. I don't know why we still have to do this, but it's Friday deck time and my wife is out. I've got time.

My point isn't that the players aren't comparable, the roles are comparable.
In terms of style, the only thing similar is high hockey IQ.
Couts is big and slow, Luchanko is elite speed and average size.

The only way I can see Luchanko sticking is he's so good defensively, that they can be patient with his offense. Like 2-3 years patient.
Now you could also say that about Cates at center, but at 25 with limited offensive upside it's a bit different.

 

[Magua]

Is it fair to judge luchenko to judge him on his junior stats when he was 17 his last season?

The Flyers are telling you that Luchanko is one of the 3 most NHL ready players in the class based on that okay junior season. So, yes, it's not only fair, it's the fairest fair to ever fair. The argument for the pick (agree or disagree) was there's latent upside in his profile. The Flyers skipped about 3 steps to tell you there's nothing latent about it.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

Is it fair to judge luchenko to judge him on his junior stats when he was 17 his last season?

Yes. We're talking about NHL readiness. That's a negative mark in specifically this discussion because it makes it even less likely he's ready.

Long term, different matter. Still doesn't get you to the same tier, but of course it bumps him up a little bit.

 

[deadhead]

The Flyers are telling you that Luchanko is one of the 3 most NHL ready players in the class based on that okay junior season. So, yes, it's not only fair, it's the fairest fair to ever fair.

It's not based on that season, it's based on what they've seen in camp, practices, scrimmages and games. And I think it's based on defense and speed, it's not like he'd be pushing an offensive juggernaut (Laughton, Cates) out of the 3C spot.

The problem for a player that young is lack of experience either makes him too timid to take chances on offense, or unable to develop the instincts to know which chances to take.

 

[freakydallas13]

"Slow" is not a term I would use to describe young Couts. He wasn't a burner, but he was an efficient skater and could cover a lot of ground in a short amount of time. Nevermind his elite positioning, which Luchanko doesn't have.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

My point isn't that the players aren't comparable, the roles are comparable.
In terms of style, the only thing similar is high hockey IQ.
Couts is big and slow, Luchanko is elite speed and average size.

The only way I can see Luchanko sticking is he's so good defensively, that they can be patient with his offense. Like 2-3 years patient.
Now you could also say that about Cates at center, but at 25 with limited offensive upside it's a bit different.

His role was that of a pure depth player. Are we absolutely sure that spending his first two seasons with his most common linemates being Max Talbot and Zac Rinaldo was a good thing for Couturier's development?

 

[freakydallas13]

It's not based on that season, it's based on what they've seen in camp, practices, scrimmages and games. And I think it's based on defense and speed, it's not like he'd be pushing an offensive juggernaut (Laughton, Cates) out of the 3C spot.

The problem for a player that young is lack of experience either makes him too timid to take chances on offense, or unable to develop the instincts to know which chances to take.

Offensive juggernaut nor not, there are those that think Cates is "a solid middle six forward". Seems significant that Luchanko would be pushing someone with that profile out.

 

[Hextallent63]

The Flyers are telling you that Luchanko is one of the 3 most NHL ready players in the class based on that okay junior season. So, yes, it's not only fair, it's the fairest fair to ever fair. The argument for the pick (agree or disagree) was there's latent upside in his profile. The Flyers skipped about 3 steps to tell you there's nothing latent about it.

You would have to take into consideration the other teams that drafted in the draft class and the depth at forward that they have and the holes that they need to fill. All the flyers are telling me at the moment at least for 9 games hopefully, is that they have s***** center depth and luchenko fills a need that they have. Not that he's the third readyest player to play in the NHl from that draft class. Personally I would like them to keep him for nine just so I can see him play a little more and then send him down.

 

[Magua]

It's not based on that season, it's based on what they've seen in camp, practices, scrimmages and games.

Ah, of course, the camp angle. Silly me. Even Meltzer and O'Connor are pretty lukewarm about his preseason work justifying this decision.

And I think it's based on defense and speed

If you're fast tracking because of defense, you're not only doing it wrong, you threw the manual into shark infested waters and are diving in after it.

This player might be the 3rd highest drafted Flyer for some time, after they possibly whiffed everything about a 5th overall. They're telling you this player needs to be a cornerstone. And that's about....defense?

 

[JojoTheWhale]

All the flyers are telling me at the moment at least for 9 games hopefully, is that they have s***** center depth and luchenko fills a need that they have. Not that he's the third readyest player to play in the NHl from that draft class.

If this is true, I think we should be more angry not less. Then it's not even about Luchanko. It's chasing marginal wins in one season prioritized over the development of what they think is a major piece.

 

[freakydallas13]

Ah, of course, the camp angle. Silly me. Even Meltzer and O'Connor are pretty lukewarm about his preseason work justifying this decision.



If you're fast tracking because of defense, you're not only doing it wrong, you threw the manual into shark infested waters and are diving in after it.

This player might be the 3rd highest drafted Flyer for some time, after they possibly whiffed everything about a 5th overall. They're telling you this player needs to be a cornerstone. And that's about....defense?

"Yeah but his defense good" as justification to play him in the NHL at 18 is the most surefire way to ensure that in the future, the only "good" thing about his game will be defense.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Ah, of course, the camp angle. Silly me. Even Meltzer and O'Connor are pretty lukewarm about his preseason work justifying this decision.



If you're fast tracking because of defense, you're not only doing it wrong, you threw the manual into shark infested waters and are diving in after it.

This player might be the 3rd highest drafted Flyer for some time, after they possibly whiffed everything about a 5th overall. They're telling you this player needs to be a cornerstone. And that's about....defense?

I mean, that would check out. Defense and looking like he hustles, the two most urgent traits the Flyers look for.

 

[Hextallent63]

Okay then so what are you all thinking? Do you think the intentions are for luchenko to play nine games and get sent back or do you think they want to keep him? And another question, if they keep him for say 20 25 games and end up sending him back that burns his first year right?