The Flyers are an incongruent Franchise.

[Lotusflower]

This is a troll post. it must be, otherwise its incredible that you cant even smell the **** youre shoveling

There are over 70 games between last Dec and now that attest to our futility. The fact that you can call this sizeable sample unsustainable alone indicates how bad Hex/Hak have mismanaged the team over just that time frame. The fact that you can ignore the other 50+ games in the sample and concentrate on the win streak and the loss streak indicate selective amnesia on your part.

At the end of the day you have to judge a GM especially on not just his draft but how he handles the pro level as well. Shocking I know.
With a true tanking team you could reasonably say the pipeline is well stocked even if the pro team is trash but that's not the case w the Flyers.
They should be a better team than they are. That's on Hexy and on Hak. Tell me honestly, did you really think we would be this bad, unsustainable or not, after making the playoffs in Hak's first year? If so, I commend you but I doubt it. Only NOW are you content to say, the pipeline is well stacked and we're on schedule for the future; after the **** has hit the fan.

Nobody in their right mind would look at a team with players the quality of Giroux, Voracek, Couturier and be fine with wasting valuable years of their prime. We'll be lucky if any of those prospects ever reach the level of impact of any of those aforementioned three. 2 years ago we had vet stars and a stacked pipeline. Today we still have those stars two years older, we still have the pipeline, but the team is in the basement.

Simply, a regression

 

[Striiker]

This is a troll post. it must be, otherwise its incredible that you cant even smell the **** youre shoveling

There are over 70 games between last Dec and now that attest to our futility. The fact that you can call this sizeable sample unsustainable alone indicates how bad Hex/Hak have mismanaged the team over just that time frame. The fact that you can ignore the other 50+ games in the sample and concentrate on the win streak and the loss streak indicate selective amnesia on your part.

Yeah, clearly a "troll post".

Never said all 70 games were unsustainable. If you paid attention to my post, like I knew you wouldn't, you'd have known that. I specifically said "unsustainably bad two month super-slump" and then "unsustainable 10 game losing streak".

Now follow along, we're going to do some math.

Last seasons two month slump, January and February, was 23 games.
This years slump is obviously 10 games.

So...
23 + 10 = 33

33 and 70 are not the same number.

In those 33 games, separated by a gap of 37 games, their record was 8-17-8... which is a lot worse than the team really is. In the other 37 games, they're 19-13-5.

If you want to expand the non-slump sample size and go ever further back to include the start of last season (October 1st until December 31st), before the slump, that 19-13-5 turns into 39-27-9....

We could even take out the unsustainable 10 game winning streak, which makes the record 29-27-9... still FAR from 8-17-8 and a MUCH better representation of the teams real ability.



Now for the rest of this dumb shit...

At the end of the day you have to judge a GM especially on not just his draft but how he handles the pro level as well. Shocking I know.
With a true tanking team you could reasonably say the pipeline is well stocked even if the pro team is trash but that's not the case w the Flyers.
They should be a better team than they are. That's on Hexy and on Hak. Tell me honestly, did you really think we would be this bad, unsustainable or not, after making the playoffs in Hak's first year? If so, I commend you but I doubt it. Only NOW are you content to say, the pipeline is well stacked and we're on schedule for the future; after the **** has hit the fan.

Nobody in their right mind would look at a team with players the quality of Giroux, Voracek, Couturier and be fine with wasting valuable years of their prime. We'll be lucky if any of those prospects ever reach the level of impact of any of those aforementioned three. 2 years ago we had vet stars and a stacked pipeline. Today we still have those stars two years older, we still have the pipeline, but the team is in the basement.

Simply, a regression

The rest of this is a mix of irrelevant nonsense and other junk. Let's speed through it:

-Yes, you judge a GM on both.

-No, you don't only judge a tanking team that way. Rebuilding teams too.

-They are better than you think they are, you're just confused.

-If you ignore the unsustainable streaks (both slumps and the win streak) then they've performed about as I expected while rebuilding and developing young guys.

-Making the playoffs in Haks first year was not a representation of the teams ability... they were mediocre at best but Giroux, Ghost, and Mason CARRIED them to the playoffs by being on FIREEEE. The way they got stomped by the Caps proved that.

-I'm not "only NOW content to the say the pipeline is well stacked and we're on schedule for the future"... I, and many others, have been saying that for a LONG time now...

-Nobody is happy with wasting the prime of the top line

-Yes, we'd be lucky for the prospects to match our top line

-The team is only "in the basement" because of the unsustainable bad streak. Before it started they were right in the middle of the pack, 8-6-2, tied for 12 in the league.

-And yet again, no, they obviously aren't regressing. Pay closer attention.


Ok, we good? Ready to skim past this post and ignore everything I said? Awesome.

 

[deadhead]

First of all, this has been a rebuild from the beginning, not a single asset spent on improving the team.
Watch what I do, not what I say.

Second, during a rebuild, the key isn't the performance of the NHL team, but the improvement in the talent pipeline.
If you sign a bunch of 30 year old FAs and street free agents like NJ, and get above .500, is that sustainable?

Yes, we're Flyer fans, we're used to being in the playoffs every year, but we've had bad stretches like this before.
At least this time there's actually a plan that can work in the cap era.

 

[Rebels57]

Holy hell there's so much wrong here I don't even know where to begin.

Instead of going line by line and wasting my time writing a giant post, I'll just point out that the reason you're so wrong is that you're hyper-focused on record and ignoring context and what actually matters (the improvement of the future of the roster).

Last year they had an unsustainably bad two months super-slump where nobody could score, which ruined the season and record. Now this year they've had an even more unsustainable 10 game losing streak. Both of these events have distorted the record so much that it no longer shows the real ability of the team. The teams still not great, but it's also certainly not as bad as the record suggests.

So TLDR: they aren't regressing, you just think they are because you're focusing on the wrong thing and ignoring what actually matters.

To put it another way...

Look at the Devils this year. I think you'd say they're improved, right? Well, based on your logic for progression/regression, if you looked at the state of their franchise this offseason you would have said they're regressing because the past season was worse than the one before. Obviously that wasn't true though, seeing as they're far better this year than either of the previous years. Now, only 26 games into this season, they have more than half their total wins last year... 15 vs 28.

What it comes down to as what your definition of regressing is. You both have different definitions and neither are wrong in their own context.

 

[Striiker]

What it comes down to as what your definition of regressing is. You both have different definitions and neither are wrong in their own context.

There's only one definition... "a return to a former or less developed state".

As far as everything other than the unsustainable short term record is concerned, they aren't regressing. I assume the point of the discussions on this board is the future of this team and how they become competitive.

They've made lots of progress in adding and developing young players and setting up the future of this team. They also haven't had any setbacks.

None of the big name young guys have busted or become worse. (Provorov, Patrick, Sanheim, etc etc etc)
None of the mid 20s+ NHL guys we're relying on are getting worse. (Couturier, Ghost, Giroux, Voracek)
And we still have a bunch of really really good prospects who are looking awesome. (Frost, Hart, all the college guys, etc)
Nothing important to the future of the team is trending in the wrong direction.

Literally one thing is going bad, and that's the coaching, which is becoming more and more likely to be changed in the near future.

So really the only difference is he's exclusively looking at the teams current/past record and I'm looking at everything that actually matters for the future.

 

[BillDineen]

Sanheim wasn't the go to guy in LV on the PP and isn't even on PP2 here. I am not sure how that is proper development.

 

[Striiker]

It's stupid that he isn't on the PP but not being on it isn't going to ruin him...

Like I keep saying, being underutilized isn't the same as ruined.

 

[hatcher]

I get the most crazy on this board but this is a no win situation. Nothing good to talk about.

 

[FLYguy3911]

I think that’s the thing that is the most frustrating part of this season. It’s one thing to lose a bunch of games because you are playing a bunch of rookies big minutes, but we can’t even hang our hat on that.

 

[Rebels57]

There's only one definition... "a return to a former or less developed state".

As far as everything other than the unsustainable short term record is concerned, they aren't regressing. I assume the point of the discussions on this board is the future of this team and how they become competitive.

They've made lots of progress in adding and developing young players and setting up the future of this team. They also haven't had any setbacks.

None of the big name young guys have busted or become worse. (Provorov, Patrick, Sanheim, etc etc etc)
None of the mid 20s+ NHL guys we're relying on are getting worse. (Couturier, Ghost, Giroux, Voracek)
And we still have a bunch of really really good prospects who are looking awesome. (Frost, Hart, all the college guys, etc)
Nothing important to the future of the team is trending in the wrong direction.

Literally one thing is going bad, and that's the coaching, which is becoming more and more likely to be changed in the near future.

So really the only difference is he's exclusively looking at the teams current/past record and I'm looking at everything that actually matters for the future.

I get that this is YOUR definition of regression. But its also fair to see the TEAM has regressed since 15-16..seeing as how they are considerably worse. Is our path to being a contender regressing as well? Only time will tell.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

I think that’s the thing that is the most frustrating part of this season. It’s one thing to lose a bunch of games because you are playing a bunch of rookies big minutes, but we can’t even hang our hat on that.

Yep. It's very frustrating. I am just hoping Hexy turns out to be right in slow-cooking them. As long as they keep cooking, we should be fine. Eventually.

 

[BringBackHakstol]

I don't agree with a premise that the Flyers need to trade their best players to properly build the team into a contender. They can do it with keeping these guys.

But what certainly is incongruent is the hoarding of assets and young guys and seemingly being unwilling to deal with what comes along with that. At some point in time with this many young players flowing into the system, they will have to play and play with big roles.

Right now, Hextall looks like a GM scared to go all in on his own strategy. That's what is so disappointing in all of this, not the record

 

[Striiker]

I get that this is YOUR definition of regression. But its also fair to see the TEAM has regressed since 15-16..seeing as how they are considerably worse. Is our path to being a contender regressing as well? Only time will tell.

... but they aren't considerably worse...

And again, there is no "my" definition... there's only one definition of the word.

 

[deadhead]

At the end of the day you have to judge a GM especially on not just his draft but how he handles the pro level as well. Shocking I know.
With a true tanking team you could reasonably say the pipeline is well stocked even if the pro team is trash but that's not the case w the Flyers.

The pipeline isn't well stocked? The Flyers don't have the best "farm system" in the NHL?
And that's before 2 1st rd picks in this draft and the potential haul in a Simmonds trade?

So the complaint is the Flyers haven't played badly enough to constitute a true tank up to now?

 

[deadhead]

I don't agree with a premise that the Flyers need to trade their best players to properly build the team into a contender. They can do it with keeping these guys.

But what certainly is incongruent is the hoarding of assets and young guys and seemingly being unwilling to deal with what comes along with that. At some point in time with this many young players flowing into the system, they will have to play and play with big roles.

Right now, Hextall looks like a GM scared to go all in on his own strategy. That's what is so disappointing in all of this, not the record

Totally agree, but here's the rub, those assets have maximum value when they reach the AHL/NHL level, where a lot of the risk of player evaluation is removed for trade partners. So to make maximum use of excess assets, Hextall has to be patient, get those players into the system, and have them show enough to raise their trade value.

The best way to do that is be patient, fill out the NHL and AHL rosters, then cull players (in trades) as new prospects push for slots.
The ones who fail will lose value, but that value is limited since the risk of failure is why draft picks and junior prospects are discounted.
But if you draft as well as the Flyers seem to be doing (especially the later rounds) you'll have more than enough hits.

And trading for veterans (other than consolidation trades for young players) has maximum impact when the team is already a contender, and is looking for one or two pieces to put them over the top.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

But the system is not set up to maximize prospects’ trade value. In fact, it’s the opposite. From ice time due to being buried behind veterans to PP opportunities to players like NAK being told to just focus on the simple things, they repeatedly undercut their value around the league by design.

 

[Tripod]

I get the most crazy on this board but this is a no win situation. Nothing good to talk about.

This might be the truest post you have ever made.



But yeah....there is good things to talk about: top prospect pool in the NHL, a legit top line again, Ghost top 5 in D scoring.

 

[deadhead]

But the system is not set up to maximize prospects’ trade value. In fact, it’s the opposite. From ice time due to being buried behind veterans to PP opportunities to players like NAK being told to just focus on the simple things, they repeatedly undercut their value around the league by design.

Sanheim was told to focus on defense, made great strides, since his early struggles he's developing into a reliable two way defenseman.
NAK's future is as a bottom six forward, probably 4th line, he'd better focus on the simple things, learn to forecheck and play on the PK or he's never going to make the NHL team.

What was Gagner's trade value?

 

[JojoTheWhale]

Sanheim was told to focus on defense, made great strides, since his early struggles he's developing into a reliable two way defenseman.
NAK's future is as a bottom six forward, probably 4th line, he'd better focus on the simple things, learn to forecheck and play on the PK or he's never going to make the NHL team.

What was Gagner's trade value?

If that’s NAK’s future, fine. Why tell him that’s what it is instead of pushing him to maximize himself and letting things shake out on their own? Instead, the standard seems to be “Who is too damn talented to fail?” That gets you Sanheim being pushed through and well, this. LHV is not developing talent the way it should be.

I don’t see what Gagner has to do with anything. Did I not go back far enough?

 

[SanBlom]

Incongruent is a pretty cool word (I guess), but I don't think it's worth making an entire thread just to use it. I would much rather prefer flabbergasted or dumbfounded....or even just call someone a dingbat.

 

[Striiker]

This might be the truest post you have ever made.



But yeah....there is good things to talk about: top prospect pool in the NHL, a legit top line again, Ghost top 5 in D scoring.

Also Sanheim's improving, Patricks improving, Konecny continues to show the flashes of skills that will be so valuable once he's allowed to play hockey, and a bunch of other good things that could be focused on, if someone actually cared to look.

 

[Rebels57]

Yep. It's very frustrating. I am just hoping Hexy turns out to be right in slow-cooking them. As long as they keep cooking, we should be fine. Eventually.

If you cook something long enough it will eventually reduce to nothing.

 

[Striiker]

If you cook something long enough it will eventually reduce to nothing.

I hope he poked holes in them or they might explode...

 

[FLYguy3911]

I always thought one of NAK's best attributes in Junior was his one-time slapper/snapshot near the LW faceoff circle on the PP. Sadly, we'll never know if it translates to the pro game because the decision makers already have their minds made up about what kind of player he's going to become.

 

[BackToTheBrierePatch]

If you cook something long enough it will eventually reduce to nothing.

before or after you burn the house down.