Confirmed with Link: Wade Allison new contract 2x $785k

[JojoTheWhale]

You can’t put young players on the 4th line because they don’t get enough ice time. You can’t just play the 4th line more because that’s not what we do here. And you’re telling me I’m supposed to have faith in this process.

While we’re at it, Zach Aston-Reese took until today to catch on with someone. Sometimes that just happens to good depth players. Not every org does things the same way or for the same reasons.

 

[usahockey22flyers]

You can’t put young players on the 4th line because they don’t get enough ice time. You can’t just play the 4th line more because that’s not what we do here. And you’re telling me I’m supposed to have faith in this process.

While we’re at it, Zach Aston-Reese took until today to catch on with someone. Sometimes that just happens to good depth players. Not every org does things the same way or for the same reasons.

I think intangibles in the room are probably over and underrated at the same time

 

[blackjackmulligan]

He's stubborn and a bit tactless, but also his reputation for being an asshole is inflated, unlike AV, who was worse than his reputation.

Torts knows what he wants, and I think like a lot of HCs, he tunes out players after repeated attempts to "fix them." TDA is a good example, they were patient with him, put him with Seeler for a time to protect him, but zero progress. Kid may have been trying too hard to impress his "homies" and wouldn't cut back on his overplay. Hayes was set in his ways, and may simply have lacked the speed to get back on defense at center and wasn't willing to commit to playing on the wing.

I think Torts would have been fine with say Ghost, they would have clashed, he would have benched him, then put him back in the lineup, and finally worked out things, like he has with Sanheim, who got stronger over the summer and so far has been more assertive on the ice. He pushed Frost, but when Frost did what he wanted, Torts gave him 2nd line minutes (exact same as Cates). He gave Allison almost a full season to show he was a top 9 player. He even gave Lemieux a shot.

I don't think Torts is big on fighters, but he does stress physical play along the boards, energy on the forecheck and backcheck, and don't be stupid. He wants players to be aggressive, but also know their responsibilities (i.e. cycle back when your D-man attacks the O-zone to cover for him). I think the style he wants the Flyers to play is similar to Carolina and the Pens (Sullivan is his protege).

such trash speculation

If I remember correctly - cap space only accumulates if you're not using LTIR. Since we are, that doesn't' apply.

why would they need to use LTIR? are they over the cap?

 

[Jettany]

doesnt matter if he was claimed. you save money by sending him down. Plus his great vet leadership would be an asset for lappy.

Basically the same money going down? Can’t bury it all.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

You can’t put young players on the 4th line because they don’t get enough ice time. You can’t just play the 4th line more because that’s not what we do here. And you’re telling me I’m supposed to have faith in this process.

While we’re at it, Zach Aston-Reese took until today to catch on with someone. Sometimes that just happens to good depth players. Not every org does things the same way or for the same reasons.

Konecny & Laughton were the only forwards that averaged over 18 minutes a night last year on this team. We can safely say that was really generous ice time for Laughton considering his talent level.

Konecny is really the only player on this currently that truly can demand that type of ice time. Couturier would be another if we knew what were getting there but coming off his injury I doubt you want to play him that much anyway.

Point is there should be more opportunities to spread ice time around with this lineup given they don’t really have talent at the top & it’s supposedly a rebuild.

 

[deadhead]

They spread time around last season, just look at the 5x5 numbers.
Lasts 56 games (when lines were set and Hayes demoted):

TK 14:44
Tippett 14:20
Frost 14:05
Hayes 13:52
Laughton 13:45
Cates 13:44
[Foerster 13:19]
Farabee 13:11
Allison 12:49
JVR 12:45
[Lemieux 11:48]

MacEwen 10:01
Brown 9:54
Deslauriers 9:08

If you rotate 3 lines on a regular basis, the 4th line gets starved for PT.
The first line last year played 2-3 minutes LESS than most first lines.

 

[Cody Webster]

 

[Ironmanrulez]

The fact that anyone here is complaining about waiving a 26yo non-prospect just highlights the fact that most of you just want to bitch and be negative. Board is almost unreadable.

is this the german version of a fake german? Your bad man! Go read facebook!

 

[VladDrag]

This is a great image when it comes to skill development, because it is honestly this simple (please understand simple doesn’t mean easy). put players in positions to succeed, give them consistent opportunity, clearly communicate, and don’t call the toilet seats…

You can find specific examples from the flyers development process in every item listed in the dumb teams list. They want all of their young forwards to play responsible defensive hockey. They want them to play north-south. They want play away from the puck. I want that too, these are good things. But prioritizing these things over players strengths is so dangerous. Allow players to have personality, unique skill sets, and stop pretending there’s only one way to play the game of hockey.

 

[Beef Invictus]

While player development could be better (which is why they've made a bunch of changes), I think the primary problem was drafting. And I think this was due to Holmgren/Hextall's philosophy, which overrated size relative to speed and skill.

So they overdrafted players like Ratcliffe, Allison, Hagg, Ginning, Goul, Dove-McFalls, Twarynski in the top 100. The fact they found players like Lindblom, Cates, Laczynski, Ersson later in the draft suggests the scouting was fine, it was the drafters who were at fault (later in the draft scouts tend to be more important than GMs, b/c GMs don't have time to look at 300 players).

I think Flahr has improved there, Bump 5th, Southeran 5th, McDonald 6th, Samson 6th, Mann & Sulku 7th, still taking size, but at more appropriate spots in the draft.

When you bet you can take a big guy and improve his skating and puck handling, you shouldn't be betting big money.

You spent years claiming that there was nothing at all wrong with player development, now they make superficial changes and you've gotten in line to proclaim it had problems?

 

[Chicken N Raffls]

View attachment 750496

stop pretending there’s only one way to play the game of hockey.

I love that list. Makes so much sense it's laughable. To the bolded though, no. Sorry

The RIGHT way!

 

[deadhead]

View attachment 750496

This is a great image when it comes to skill development, because it is honestly this simple (please understand simple doesn’t mean easy). put players in positions to succeed, give them consistent opportunity, clearly communicate, and don’t call the toilet seats…

You can find specific examples from the flyers development process in every item listed in the dumb teams list. They want all of their young forwards to play responsible defensive hockey. They want them to play north-south. They want play away from the puck. I want that too, these are good things. But prioritizing these things over players strengths is so dangerous. Allow players to have personality, unique skill sets, and stop pretending there’s only one way to play the game of hockey.

No, they don't want all their players to play north south, Allison yes, because he lacks playmaking skills and made too many bad east west passes.

Prioritizing responsible defensive hockey does not detract from players' strengths (unless their strength is cherry picking). Asking offensive forwards to backcheck does not take away from their offensive game unless they're not in good condition and it forces them to stop gliding.

Torts doesn't ask Frost to play a physical game, he wants him to play a responsible game, back check, get into defensive position and stick check to break up plays.

There are plenty of examples of players who are both dangerous offensively and play responsible hockey, we've seen that with Couts and Giroux, Crosby, Bergeron, Point, etc.

 

[VladDrag]

Prioritizing responsible defensive hockey does not detract from players' strengths (unless their strength is cherry picking). Asking offensive forwards to backcheck does not take away from their offensive game unless they're not in good condition and it forces them to stop gliding.

Do you know what the word prioritizing means? By definition of the word, it detracts from other areas. Doing exactly this (prioritizing 'responsible' hockey) you are doing the first thing on the dumb team list. Focus on what they do well first, then bring in other areas of the game.

There are plenty of examples of players who are both dangerous offensively and play responsible hockey, we've seen that with Couts and Giroux, Crosby, Bergeron, Point, etc.

These are some of the best most effective players in the world. Do you really think is fair to use these players as comparisons? (Don't forget playoff MacKinnon btw)

 

[ajgoal]

View attachment 750496

This is a great image when it comes to skill development, because it is honestly this simple (please understand simple doesn’t mean easy). put players in positions to succeed, give them consistent opportunity, clearly communicate, and don’t call the toilet seats…

You can find specific examples from the flyers development process in every item listed in the dumb teams list. They want all of their young forwards to play responsible defensive hockey. They want them to play north-south. They want play away from the puck. I want that too, these are good things. But prioritizing these things over players strengths is so dangerous. Allow players to have personality, unique skill sets, and stop pretending there’s only one way to play the game of hockey.

Remember, this graphic came from a larger article which specifically mentioned how the Flyers tried to develop Gostisbehere as a "dumb team" example.

Edit: Sorry, was less of an article than I was remembering. How to Ruin a Player

 

[deadhead]

Do you know what the word prioritizing means? By definition of the word, it detracts from other areas. Doing exactly this (prioritizing 'responsible' hockey) you are doing the first thing on the dumb team list. Focus on what they do well first, then bring in other areas of the game.



These are some of the best most effective players in the world. Do you really think is fair to use these players as comparisons? (Don't forget playoff MacKinnon btw)

No, it doesn't detract from other areas if a player is fundamentally sound, that is, knows how to play the game. You don't ask Frost to be defense first, you don't expect Cates to be a top offensive player, but you expect Frost to do the basics, back check, get into position, don't get caught up ice.

You don't expect Michkov to be a Selke candidate (though Crosby became one in his late 20s), you just don't want him to be so sloppy that he's a liability on defense.

One reason for "roles" is to put players in position to use their best attributes, some players simply aren't good enough offensively to play them in that role, but can contribute as forecheckers and PK guys. Some players are best doing the dirty work on scoring lines (Lindblom before he got cancer), getting the puck to more talented linemates. Winning board battles, for example, is only partially about size and strength, it's also about leverage and stick work.

The philosophy that if a player is good offensively, you let him ride on his defensive responsibilities may explain why talented offensive teams often come up short in the playoffs - because in the regular season checking isn't as tight, other teams are inferior or have off nights - and you can get away with that approach. But we've seen plenty of regular season stars go MIA in the playoffs.

 

[VladDrag]

No, it doesn't detract from other areas if a player is fundamentally sound, that is, knows how to play the game. You don't ask Frost to be defense first, you don't expect Cates to be a top offensive player, but you expect Frost to do the basics, back check, get into position, don't get caught up ice.

I agree with this, wholeheartedly...

But that's not what this team did last year. In the beginning of the season, Frost played with ND, with MacEwen etc. How do you expect him to do anything with these players who suck offensively? Cates got to play with our best offensive forwards in TK and Farabee. And guess what, at the beginning of training came Torts is still talking about how Frost needs to be better defensively. And, Cates is still getting the best offensive winger on the team. The messaging is way presented in what they do, not what they say.

You don't expect Michkov to be a Selke candidate (though Crosby became one in his late 20s), you just don't want him to be so sloppy that he's a liability on defense.

I want every play to be as effective as possible. If Michkov can be most effective by solely focusing on offense, then I don't give a shit. Same with Cates and defensively. If he becomes the most effective defensive center in the league, I'm all on board. Just don't give him TK as a winger.

One reason for "roles" is to put players in position to use their best attributes, some players simply aren't good enough offensively to play them in that role, but can contribute as forecheckers and PK guys. Some players are best doing the dirty work on scoring lines (Lindblom before he got cancer), getting the puck to more talented linemates. Winning board battles, for example, is only partially about size and strength, it's also about leverage and stick work.

I don't disagree with the main focus of this paragraph. Some players will be more effective focusing on different parts of their game. That's exactly what I'm saying, development is individualized. So if some players are better in area X then leverage those strengths to the fullest, but don't assume everyone has to play the same to be effective.

Your last paragraph has no bearing on a developmental conversation.

 

[GKJ]

View attachment 750496

This is a great image when it comes to skill development, because it is honestly this simple (please understand simple doesn’t mean easy). put players in positions to succeed, give them consistent opportunity, clearly communicate, and don’t call the toilet seats…

You can find specific examples from the flyers development process in every item listed in the dumb teams list. They want all of their young forwards to play responsible defensive hockey. They want them to play north-south. They want play away from the puck. I want that too, these are good things. But prioritizing these things over players strengths is so dangerous. Allow players to have personality, unique skill sets, and stop pretending there’s only one way to play the game of hockey.

Saving this for future use.

 

[wasup]

Sometimes Tortorella would do better to just shut his mouth than to utter the inane things that he often does. Allison to "play better" is one of those moments. Play better like how? Better passing? Better shooting? Better defensively? Better with/without the puck? If you're not going to say what you want a guy to improve, then being quiet is a better tactic. Cracking off about toilet seats and the such makes no sense.
However here is a problem with the Flyers player development. When a player gets sent down to LHV, it's obvious that there are areas of their game that need to improve. Fine. Who down there is capable of working with a player to improve on their deficiencies? What often happens is the guys get sent down there and nothing changes with their play. When they get back up it's more of the same. Good organizations have coaches in the minors that are capable of bringing better play out of their players by improving them in specific areas of their games. I don''t see that in the Flyers organization right now.

You had me at Tortorella would do better just shutting the F up .

 

[JojoTheWhale]

In hockey specifically, roles are marginalized by the freeform nature of the sport. That doesn't mean complimentary skillets have no value. It just moves them further down the hierarchy of priorities than the Flyers have treated them.

That's the most maddening part for me personally. They skip a whole bunch of steps you need to cross before you get to that finetuning.

 

[Chicken N Raffls]

In hockey specifically, roles are marginalized by the freeform nature of the sport. That doesn't mean complimentary skillets have no value. It just moves them further down the hierarchy of priorities than the Flyers have treated them.

That's the most maddening part for me personally. They skip a whole bunch of steps you need to cross before you get to that finetuning.

They are so obsessed with roles, I feel like if you're not in the top 10 (5?) Percent or bottom 5-10, you get put into the molder. They want to force fit players into their ideal, instead of adapting to what those players excell at.

It's why you see posts like "lol offensive dynamo Frost" If you're not Gretzky, you better damn play some D kid! And "internet fans" aside, I can't help but believe that is the thinking of this org.

A sort of tangent example for me personally would be the NBA. Up until the last couple years, I hadn't watched an NBA game since the early 2000's. There are so many guys these days that would have been scrubs back then. Now they can shoot 3's, which used to be a way more specialized skill.

The Flyers (and tbf, hockey in general) just don't do that. Imagine a 4th liner with a disgusting wrister. Or McJesus speed. Or a pitch that's virtually unhittable. Those guys exist in other sports because they're encouraged to do what they can, and try to make the most of the things they excel at.

But 4th liners in hockey need a very specific (non) skillset. That's why you can't play prospects there of course.

So yea, finetuning hahaha. Flyers are more on the broad tuning spectrum I think.

 

[deadhead]

The Flyers (and tbf, hockey in general) just don't do that. Imagine a 4th liner with a disgusting wrister. Or McJesus speed. Or a pitch that's virtually unhittable. Those guys exist in other sports because they're encouraged to do what they can, and try to make the most of the things they excel at.

But 4th liners in hockey need a very specific (non) skillset. That's why you can't play prospects there of course.

You have it ass backwards. What team has 12 skilled forwards with above average speed?
In fact, few teams have six forwards who are legitimate top 6 players.
So how do you fill out your roster and kill the 22 minutes a night played by your bottom six?

You can:
1) field mediocre offense players and have them focus on offense and watch better players skate rings around them, lots of guys like Gagner float around the league and have one or two good seasons in ten.

2) field bottom six talents, but pick ones who can forecheck and play defense, so while they may not score much matched against better lines, they won't be sieves either, and can eat minutes while better talents rest between shifts. A good fourth line doesn't bleed goals and wears down opponents physically.

3) field limited players and shelter them, which is what many teams do with 3rd line veterans who have offensive skills but are otherwise limited, get them easy matchups (harder on the road), limit their minutes, and spot their shifts so they can focus on offense.

(2) and (3) are what smart teams do, depending on their mix of players.

Every team would love to have bottom six players who could skate like the wind, but they have to have brains enough not to be liabilities as well (see Rinaldo, NAK's bad penalties, etc.).

In reality, unless you're an incredibly deep franchise, those bottom six players are a mix of unproven prospects who are mistake prone, aging veterans who need to be spotted, and tough forechecker types who can control play and maintain puck possession even if they can't finish.

On bad teams, your bottom few players are AHL plus types, one reason you're a bad team.

 

[Chicken N Raffls]

I have it ass backwards? When did I say anything about having 12 skaters who skate like the wind? My point was about maximizing skillsets for individual players. Figure out how to do that before you even think about team building.

If you're hellbent on filling roles, at least figure out the best way to do that ie: drafting/trading for/acquiring players who have upside on the skills you want for that role. The Flyers try to make everyone into that guy instead of finding that guy. Ass backwards much?

Did you happen to read the part of my post about the NBA? Different sport, get that. How many guys in the NBA shot 3's 20 years ago? Sports evolve, like everything else. Except hockey I guess. 4th liners have to inheritely suck, because hockey.

 

[deadhead]

I have it ass backwards? When did I say anything about having 12 skaters who skate like the wind? My point was about maximizing skillsets for individual players. Figure out how to do that before you even think about team building.

If you're hellbent on filling roles, at least figure out the best way to do that ie: drafting/trading for/acquiring players who have upside on the skills you want for that role. The Flyers try to make everyone into that guy instead of finding that guy. Ass backwards much?

Did you happen to read the part of my post about the NBA? Different sport, get that. How many guys in the NBA shot 3's 20 years ago? Sports evolve, like everything else. Except hockey I guess. 4th liners have to inheritely suck, because hockey.

The reason they're 4th liners is they inherently suck, if you're a solid middle six talent you don't stay on the 4th line for long. For one thing, you'll become too expensive to keep there,

Hathaway is a good example, he's a top 4th line guy, who can play 3RW in a pinch, but if he could produce enough to be a 3RW on a consistent basis, some team would have signed/traded for him to fill that role. Allison got that shot last season at 25, and didn't show enough that any team in the NHL was interested in claiming him for minimum wage off waivers. Players sort themselves into different roles after a couple years in the league, only a few are able to take their game up a notch.

The problem with drafting 18 year old players is most of them play a top 6 role at lower levels, so few are ready for a bottom six role, you see this in the NBA as well, you take a kid who scored 25 ppg in college and he has to learn to come off the bench for 6 minutes a half and play defense in the pros. So if you can't score at a NHL level, and you have little experience playing on a checking line, you're in limbo until you either improve your offense or learn how to play a bottom six role. Players like Avon and Desnoyers have an advantage having played that role at a lower level, it's easier for them to adjust to that role while they try to develop a NHL offensive game.

 

[Tripod]

Deadsplaining

Shit players are better for the 4th line because they are used to being shit players.

 

[Beef Invictus]

We should deliberately have bad players because 4th liners aren't as good as 1st liners, so why shoot higher?