Confirmed with Link: Vinny Lecavalier (Reports: 5 years, $4.5 per season, NMC; jersey #40; upds post #1)
- Thread starter 3Fs
- Start date
Hiesenberg
Registered User
- Jul 2, 2013
- 15,576
- 1,875
John Shannon @JSportsnet 24s
Red Wings have been told they are not in the Vinny Lecavalier bidding war. Sounds like he's close to deciding.
Well Lebrun missed on one already
Red Wings have been told they are not in the Vinny Lecavalier bidding war. Sounds like he's close to deciding.
Well Lebrun missed on one already
flyershockey
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2006
- 13,601
- 6,754
This is getting out of hand. It just sounds like guys are throwing **** against the wall in the hopes that they might be right.
bennysflyers16
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2004
- 85,982
- 64,272
phlocky
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2007
- 7,566
- 389
LOL, I think you are finally getting it. Now YOU have the knowledge, wisdom and expertise to be a "hockey insider". YOU can start your own site and list crap as "rumors" yourself.
You'd have just as much chance of being right as they do.BTW, Ektard DOES read this board and he actually does use some of the ideas floated around here for his "rumor" site. About 2 years ago we started a fake "rumor" about a deal being done between the flyers and another team (can't remember the specifics of the fake deal) but not 5 minutes after the thread opened Ektard had it on his site as "I'm hearing that "such-and-such" deal is all but finished, more later, E5" and when his "rumor" was posted in our thread and we all laughed because it confirmed he's a fake, that "rumor" was quickly removed from his site. He does have some sources with the Flyers but yes, even that Pejorative Slur just throws completely unsubstantiated crap up on his site.
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
Giroux It
Registered User
I think LeCavalier is a good idea if your not upset about moving Coots. Which I think is a good move for the team. You get a true 2C and can then attempt to acquire the Dman you sorely need. Otherwise I think the deal is pointless.
Curufinwe
Registered User
- Feb 28, 2013
- 56,978
- 45,373
Who is playing 3C against the other team's best forwards if Couturier is traded?
Giroux It
Registered User
Most likely Schenn, possibly Laughton. Laughton I picture more as your initial 4C. The problem is the Flyers won't move Schenn because they have Luke, even though it makes no sense from a business perspective. Coots is piece that will be needed to get you any top Dman. Your not going to get one by moving Laughton IMO.
Random Forest
Registered User
- May 12, 2010
- 14,636
- 1,331
I don't understand the people saying this would spell the end of Couturier. It would be perfect for his development.
I don't want to jam Couturier into the 2C role if he's not ready for it. Let Lecavalier handle those responsibilities for the next one to two years and then flip him with Couturier when age catches up to Vinny. I think Giroux-Lecavalier-Couturier would be excellent for the immediate future, then a little further down the line Giroux-Couturier-Lecavalier would be the new dynamic.
EDIT: Then Schenn to the wing, and Laughton to the 4C role or dangled as trade bait to fill other holes once he proves himself in the NHL.
Exactly.
Couturier wouldn't be our second line center, even if we won't get Lecavalier. Schenn would be.
It's pretty much Lecavalier or any other top6/top9-forward you can get out of FA. If it's a winger, he'll play next to one of Schenn or Couturier, if it's Lecavalier you move Schenn to his wing.
We need one top6 forward to replace the hobbit and Lecavalier is probably the best option.
Would love to add his size.
flyersjamminontheone
In Claude we trust
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
That doesn't make sense unless we're trading both Schenns, which isn't happening.
Curufinwe
Registered User
- Feb 28, 2013
- 56,978
- 45,373
Schenn is not the guy you want trying to shut down the other team's top lines. Neither is 19 year old Scott Laughton.
bennysflyers16
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2004
- 85,982
- 64,272
Beef Invictus
Revolutionary Positivity
Ah, more talk about moving Couturier. Moving Couts takes the team further from Cup contention. Every single Cup winning team since the Cap era began has a Selke-nominated two-way center. Couturier's development curve in 2 seasons suggests he ought to become that sort of player. So, let's keep him.
EstimatedProphet
Registered User
- Jun 26, 2013
- 17
- 0
If we do manage to sign VL then why not think about packaging the Schenns for a legit number 1 dman? I don't think that sounds all that preposterous
Embiid
Marcus Hayes "bitch" slapper
Stizzle
Registered User
- Feb 3, 2012
- 13,209
- 23,193
People just don't understand how important to this teams future he is. Look at the last run of cup champs... Towes, Bergerson, Kopitar, J. Staal, Datsuyk.
ayshplaysh
Registered User
- Jul 2, 2011
- 449
- 0
Why would we trade Couturier? Look at the lineup right now:
Hartnell - Giroux - Voracek
EMPTY - Schenn - Simmonds
EMPTY - Couturier - Read
Rinaldo - Laughton - Talbot
We're missing a top 6 player and a third line winger, yes you could slot Read in on the second line but then the third line looks considerably weaker. I would propose signing Gagne for the the third line and Lecavalier for the second, he can play either center or wing, although I'd like Schenn to get accustomed to the wing because in the future you would may want Couturier to center that second line.
Hartnell - Giroux - Voracek
EMPTY - Schenn - Simmonds
EMPTY - Couturier - Read
Rinaldo - Laughton - Talbot
We're missing a top 6 player and a third line winger, yes you could slot Read in on the second line but then the third line looks considerably weaker. I would propose signing Gagne for the the third line and Lecavalier for the second, he can play either center or wing, although I'd like Schenn to get accustomed to the wing because in the future you would may want Couturier to center that second line.
Beef Invictus
Revolutionary Positivity
And Richards, Brind'Amour, and Pahlsson. A lot of attention gets paid to the need for a #1 Dman, but let's not overlook the need for a high-level two way center.
So if the Flyers get VL and Gagne, You are looking at something like,
Hartnell - Giroux - Voracek
Schenn - Lecavalier - Simmonds
Gagne - Couturier - Read
Talbot - Laughton - Rinaldo
That's pretty damn good isn't it? Honestly I would start off swapping Simmonds and Voracek, I would love a 2nd line of Schenn - VL - Voracek. I would be confident putting any of those lines out in any situation.
blinds
Registered User
- Jan 5, 2012
- 3,111
- 526
Why do so many people think signing Vinny means trading one of Schenn or Couts?
Not moving Schenn to wing is what means probably trading Couts eventually. Getting Vinny just means moving Schenn to wing now, and letting Couts and Vinny switch 2 and 3C roles when Couts develops a little more offense and gets better at draws, and when Vinny starts to show his age a little more.
Vinny also means we can compete a hell of a lot better. We need a veteran leader like him up front with Briere gone. Keeping Schenn and Couts as 2C and 3C means we have another year of inconsistency on our 2nd and 3rd lines, and another year of most likely well below average draws for half of our lineup.
We're stacked with young centers, but they're not good centers yet. Schenn and Couts are good but both having glaring deficiencies and the inability to stay consistent is a huge one. I think all of us are convinced they'll both be very good, but they aren't very good yet. Vinny changes that. He's very consistent, very good on draws, and he brings some maturity that our forwards are lacking right now.
Part of why we sucked this year was because we couldn't score like the year before. Everyone pretty much agrees we had too high of expectations for Schenn and Couts; why do that again?
Not moving Schenn to wing is what means probably trading Couts eventually. Getting Vinny just means moving Schenn to wing now, and letting Couts and Vinny switch 2 and 3C roles when Couts develops a little more offense and gets better at draws, and when Vinny starts to show his age a little more.
Vinny also means we can compete a hell of a lot better. We need a veteran leader like him up front with Briere gone. Keeping Schenn and Couts as 2C and 3C means we have another year of inconsistency on our 2nd and 3rd lines, and another year of most likely well below average draws for half of our lineup.
We're stacked with young centers, but they're not good centers yet. Schenn and Couts are good but both having glaring deficiencies and the inability to stay consistent is a huge one. I think all of us are convinced they'll both be very good, but they aren't very good yet. Vinny changes that. He's very consistent, very good on draws, and he brings some maturity that our forwards are lacking right now.
Part of why we sucked this year was because we couldn't score like the year before. Everyone pretty much agrees we had too high of expectations for Schenn and Couts; why do that again?
healthyscratch
Registered User
