Confirmed with Link: Flyers sign C Boyd Gordon

[Curufinwe]

Just added another to the ignore list.

Me too.

 

[Random Forest]

What's the point? You clearly know you took parts of things I said and exaggerated them into straw man arguments to attack.

There's a reason you didn't use my exact quotes.

Again, you're free to clear the record. Your posts are so chalk full of nonsense, there's no shortage of quotes to pull from if I still had the desire to actually maintain a discussion with you, but I don't. And clearly I'm not the only one.

 

[deadhead]

Why do you have this weird need of separating ES and PP production in every of your post? They are worth the same. We have had excellent PP for years, so yes most of our forwards will have a lot of points from PP, is it bad thing that we have such a good PP? It almost looks so from your posts. And yeah we have 5 legitimate top 6 forwards

Well, to be fair, I have the same need, because they are different skills. Superstars excel at both, most players are better in one role than the other.

PP scorers are important, some guys can do it and some can't.
But most of the game is played at ES, and at ES both scoring and possession are important, it takes a lot more energy to play in your D-zone all game, and if you keep it in the O-zone the majority of time you're on the ice, that's effective defense.

Which is why Raffl is fine on the 2nd line, he won't put up big number b/c he's not a good PP player, but he'll help your possession metrics at ES and scores ES goals at a relatively high rate. On the second PP, hopefully he can be replaced by someone on the 3rd line.

And for the same reason, Weise is good depth because he can fill that forechecker, get the puck to the scoring forwards or Ghost/MDZ/Provorov/Gudas to fire it in on net role.

If for example, Konecny makes the team, he'll skate on the third line and the second power play unit. You don't want him playing a lot of minutes on the 2nd line as a rookie taking a beating, you want to spot his minutes where he can make an offensive contribution.

 

[GKJ]

Why do you have this weird need of separating ES and PP production in every of your post? They are worth the same. We have had excellent PP for years, so yes most of our forwards will have a lot of points from PP, is it bad thing that we have such a good PP? It almost looks so from your posts. And yeah we have 5 legitimate top 6 forwards



Does anyone think so? High skill player for top 6 should obviously have better and higher impact on the team than adding bottom 6 player, but it's not a rule... Adding Weise, Gordon was still great move by Hextall as he identified the need of improving our bottom 6 (the impact may be higher than you want to admit, as Hextall stated in regards to face-offs etc.)

I mean who the hell is superstar at ES? Such a weird combination. As long as Giroux is racking up points and we are winning, doesn't really matter if it's PP or ES. PPs are now even more important because the play on ES is being very well coached and it's very balanced. It's becoming more and more tough to score at ES for everyone.

That's why it's good to have guys who are good at it. More of the game is played 5v5 than 5v4.

 

[deadhead]

This brings up another point, most of the scorers people want to add wouldn't play on the first two lines because they're not willing to do the "dirty work" that Hasktol requires, they'd be limited minute 3rd line guys who contribute on the 2nd PP. Now what do you pay for a guy in that kind of role? We saw this with Gagner, who simply wasn't tough enough to play on the top two lines (and get 15+ minutes a night).

 

[BackWithaVengeance]

This brings up another point, most of the scorers people want to add wouldn't play on the first two lines because they're not willing to do the "dirty work" that Hasktol requires, they'd be limited minute 3rd line guys who contribute on the 2nd PP. Now what do you pay for a guy in that kind of role? We saw this with Gagner, who simply wasn't tough enough to play on the top two lines (and get 15+ minutes a night).

Nevermind, Landeskog will and the Avalanche, of course, trades him for spare parts and futures.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Again, you're free to clear the record. Your posts are so chalk full of nonsense, there's no shortage of quotes to pull from if I still had the desire to actually maintain a discussion with you, but I don't. And clearly I'm not the only one.

All you have to do is read what I actually wrote. I'm not going to repeat it for you in order to "clear the record" of the straw man arguments you created.

Basically, you take a position of mine you disagree with, and then frame it in an extreme way to make it easy to attack. It's the oldest trick in the book, & it's disingenuous.

Seems some people here are just overly sensitive that I wasn't a huge fan of the Allison pick; that I think the Flyers need to upgrade speed & skill in the top 6; and that replacing White & Gagner with Gordon and Weise is a minor upgrade which will help faceoffs, but is being overrated with regard to the overall impact it will have on a team whose best line in the playoffs was already its 4th line.

My positions are not extreme, but it appears any expression of skepticism or mild disappointment is forbidden or twisted into something extreme.

And by all means, those who can't handle reading any viewpoints that aren't through orange & black glasses, please ignore. It's not like I'm being a troll or an ass, & I thought the board could handle differing opinions.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

All you have to do is read what I actually wrote. I'm not going to repeat it for you in order to "clear the record" of the straw man arguments you created.

Basically, you take a position of mine you disagree with, and then frame it in an extreme way to make it easy to attack. It's the oldest trick in the book, & it's disingenuous.

Seems some people here are just overly sensitive that I wasn't a huge fan of the Allison pick; that I think the Flyers need to upgrade speed & skill in the top 6; and that replacing White & Gagner with Gordon and Weise is a minor upgrade which will help faceoffs, but is being overrated with regard to the overall impact it will have on a team whose best line in the playoffs was already its 4th line.

My positions are not extreme, but it appears any expression of skepticism or mild disappointment is forbidden or twisted into something extreme.

And by all means, those who can't handle reading any viewpoints that aren't through orange & black glasses, please ignore. It's not like I'm being a troll or an ass, & I thought the board could handle differing opinions.

Can't imagine what gave you that idea!

 

[Random Forest]

Differing opinions are more than welcome as long as they're substantiated by more than the wet toilet-paper claims you've routinely made.

There is no problem with your opinion of Allison. But there is a problem when you substantiate that opinion with the statement that he "sucked" until midway through this year. There is no problem with your opinion of the strength of our top six. Only when you substantiate that opinion with the fact that "many people consider Couturier a third liner". There is no problem with your opinion of Tomek. Only when you substantiate that opinion with observations of his demeanor during a meaningless summer pickup game. See where I'm going?

Plenty of people have plenty of opinions around here. And they all get respected as long as they're coherent and well-reasoned. Yours have not been.

 

[kyuss]

Hot takes from Ghost's Beer in the last week or so:

-Couturier is a third liner
-Voracek's only had one good season
-Improving your fourth line doesn't improve the team in other areas
-Wade Allison was a poor pick because he didn't have the PPG of 5'8 Vitaly Abramov
-Development camp showed that Matej Tomek has terrible demeanor and is outclassed by Felix Sandstrom in every way


Some quality insight. I'd ignore him as well, but I legitimately find these hot takes amusing.

I think you found Carchidi's handle.

 

[Striiker]

Anyone ever notice it's the people who make unsubstantiated claims that accuse others of being intolerant of different opinions?

I mean I argue with people on here all the time, it's never once crossed my mind that I was being attacked for simply having a different viewpoint.

 

[daynus]

I think part of HEXYS thinking is, he didn't trust guys like white,gagner and guys like Weiss and Gordon are versatile, give giroux rest on the pk and get some goal scoring from Weiss.Guys like cousins Laughton if they are able to up their game for a full season, hextall will move a few guys, and then bring up a few prospects from the ahl, and if cousins,Laughton types do not improve, then they may be the guys moved. Just do some tinkering to improve the big clubs roster.

 

[Tripod]

Some glad I was out shopping today and missed the drama. But hey, might as well chime in!

If someone says they want a top 6 LW which in turn pushes Raffl down to line 3, I understand that.
To say our top 6 is "thin" because of Raffl in it, makes no sense.
Raffl finished 52nd in LW points....is that not low end 2nd line production?
We have 4 players who produced as 1st liners
Then we have Couts who was on pace for top 6 production(50 pts) and paced for 65 points from Nov 28th onward
Simmonds and the myth of being a PP guy only....he was 15th in ES RW scoring this year. FACT.
Anyone who uses Gordon's points to determine his value does not know enough about hockey, or has never played.

Having to have our 4th line take OZ starts and play mostly against 4th lines, is a bad thing. Ideally, the 4th line can play against anyone and take DZone starts, you know, so your scoring lines can have a better chance to score.

Removing White and adding Gordon means Giroux does not have to start in our end all the time for a faceoff, then go off after 5 seconds so another zap layer can go out. Now, Gordon can take that faceoff and their entire goal is to not get scored on, and try and get to the OZ. Then get the hell off. Gordon fills a MUCH bigger need of a good defensive C, than White as a winger.

Weise is an upgrade over Gagner/Umberger. He will provide as much offense, yet can play on any line and suits Hakstol's system much better. And if an injury occurs, which it will, he can move up the lineup without issue.

In a perfect world, we we add Erikkson for 3 years at 5 million. That was not happening. I knew it...as did most others. We have help on the way on the wing soon with Konecny, Lindblom and NAK. I expect 2 of those guys on our opening day roster in 2017.

At C, unless a Cousins improves, we have no help until Rubstov is ready which will be even longer. I think our need for another solid C is bigger than at wing...short term and long term.

I have no one on ignore so far although some people have made me think about it. I have no issue if people have different opinions. In fact, I expect it. But at least be able to back up what you say or be prepared for others to question it, and in some cases, rip your opinion to shreds.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Magua]

^

I understand the Gordon signing in terms of what they were after...but I am skeptical he can not only take a lot of D starts but can line match, which is really what is needed. He faced the second easiest quality of competition on the Yotes last year among regulars. He may have been massacred starts wise, but he wasn't exactly being used in elite shutdown situations. If a top 6 line is out, you feel comfortable with his line out too against them? No, I feel comfortable with G or Coots out there. Like I said, I'm a bit skeptical.

Listen, I don't want G to get bogged down, but the other team is always trying to put their top lines and d men out against him. He will never have it anything but hard with competition. And if we are yearning for that magical time where Adam Hall took all the d zone starts...Giroux only took 1% more this year than that year. Really his zone starts have been pretty identical his career -- he actually had more o zone starts this past season than in some of his peak years.

 

[Random Forest]

^

I understand the Gordon signing in terms of what they were after...but I am skeptical he can not only take a lot of D starts but can line match, which is really what is needed. He faced the second easiest quality of competition on the Yotes last year among regulars. He may have been massacred starts wise, but he wasn't exactly being used in elite shutdown situations.

And that's totally fine. Couturier is never going to escape the top matchups, nor should he. As long as he isn't burdened with egregious D zone starts it should be a positive factor. Remember, Couturier actually did get relatively easier minutes this season, and it had an impact. We'll see what kind of impact it could have if the Flyers can actually ice a proper fourth line next season.

Listen, I don't want G to get bogged down, but the other team is always trying to put their top lines and d men out against him. He will never have it anything but hard with competition. And if we are yearning for that magical time where Adam Hall took all the d zone starts...Giroux only took 1% more this year than that year. Really his zone starts have been pretty identical his career -- he actually had more o zone starts this past season than in some of his peak years.

I don't think anyone is expecting Gordon to turn Giroux into a whole new player. But he will free up certain deployments that Giroux and Couturier couldn't get before. And remember, we're not just talking about Boyd Gordon. We're talking about the whole fourth line being more capable now. Read-Gordon-Bellemarre blows VdV-Bellemarre-White out of the water. Read is still quite a capable defensive player in terms of suppressing opponents. That line would be able to take deployments we would not have been able to assign to the fourth line before.

 

[Curufinwe]

And they wont get 200 OZ starts to waste like the Hak line did.

 

[Rebels57]

^

I understand the Gordon signing in terms of what they were after...but I am skeptical he can not only take a lot of D starts but can line match, which is really what is needed. He faced the second easiest quality of competition on the Yotes last year among regulars. He may have been massacred starts wise, but he wasn't exactly being used in elite shutdown situations. If a top 6 line is out, you feel comfortable with his line out too against them? No, I feel comfortable with G or Coots out there. Like I said, I'm a bit skeptical.

Listen, I don't want G to get bogged down, but the other team is always trying to put their top lines and d men out against him. He will never have it anything but hard with competition. And if we are yearning for that magical time where Adam Hall took all the d zone starts...Giroux only took 1% more this year than that year. Really his zone starts have been pretty identical his career -- he actually had more o zone starts this past season than in some of his peak years.

I dont think anyone ever insinuated that Gordon would be our shutdown center. He will just ease the burden, PK, and take some big faceoffs.

 

[Magua]

And that's totally fine. Couturier is never going to escape the top matchups, nor should he. As long as he isn't burdened with egregious D zone starts it should be a positive factor. Remember, Couturier actually did get relatively easier minutes this season, and it had an impact. We'll see what kind of impact it could have if the Flyers can actually ice a proper fourth line next season.

Coots saw almost identical usage this year to the past. Still far and away highest QoC. And in his previous two seasons he had 26% and 25% o zone faceoffs. He had 27% this year. It's kind of a myth that his "easier" usage bred his success. He got actual top 6 linemates. Quality of teammate is always most important. He also made strides himself. I just don't think usage had anything to do with his surge this year.

I don't think anyone is expecting Gordon to turn Giroux into a whole new player. But he will free up certain deployments that Giroux and Couturier couldn't get before. And remember, we're not just talking about Boyd Gordon. We're talking about the whole fourth line being more capable now. Read-Gordon-Bellemarre blows VdV-Bellemarre-White out of the water. Read is still quite a capable defensive player in terms of suppressing opponents. That line would be able to take deployments we would not have been able to assign to the fourth line before.

The 4th line last year was one of the worst lines in all of hockey. They were fairly sheltered and got clobbered in possession and goals against crap competition. Read is a very capable defensive forward. Maybe #4 on the team. I think Pebbles will prove better defensively on the wing (don't think he's a great center). But I don't want them seeing 55% d zone starts either. Good teams don't do that -- there's a reason his usage was like that (Gordon) on some of the worst teams in hockey. Ideally you can roll 4 lines and all can eat 2-way minutes and none are grossly used in any zone (of course you want top guys to see juicy o starts but not to the point of sheltering). If they can just not be sheltered and can do well or break even, that's a very good 4th. I think the team could be better, but the effect on Giroux is a bit overblown imo.

 

[Magua]

I dont think anyone ever insinuated that Gordon would be our shutdown center. He will just ease the burden, PK, and take some big faceoffs.

But was G really out there taking d zone faceoffs against bottom 6 players? If he did, it was usually just on and off. That will change I assume. It's small but nice. They can take G off the PK (partly sad bc he's probably the second best on the team), but they can do that with or without Gordon. Raffl, Laughton...why they weren't regulars or for Raffl even used was confusing. They both have shown strong when given the chance. PK faceoffs though for a righty with Gordon...so that's a nice small change too.

I'm just not sure it changes a whole lot with Giroux and the burden he carries. I think people see him get clobbered in the playoffs and late and worry about him. But no Coots and his injury (which a younger Ghost got too in less demanding minutes) was probably was more at play. I think the more significant beneficiaries of Gordon could be the 3rd line, which can now be even more sheltered.

 

[Random Forest]

Coots saw almost identical usage this year to the past. Still far and away highest QoC. And in his previous two seasons he had 26% and 25% o zone faceoffs. He had 27% this year. It's kind of a myth that his "easier" usage bred his success. He got actual top 6 linemates. Quality of teammate is always most important. He also made strides himself. I just don't think usage had anything to do with his surge this year.

Eh, going from 25.5% OZ starts in 2014-15 to 27.32% last season is a decent margin over the course of a full year. Remember, 33% would be an even split across all three zones. A single percentage point isn't a trivial difference. It's not massive either, but for a player like Couturier, could a couple percentage points be the difference between 45 points and 50? Perhaps. Ideally, I'd want Couturier to be getting ~28% or so. Again, not looking for or expecting anything drastic.

The 4th line last year was one of the worst lines in all of hockey. They were fairly sheltered and got clobbered in possession and goals against crap competition. Read is a very capable defensive forward. Maybe #4 on the team. I think Pebbles will prove better defensively on the wing (don't think he's a great center). But I don't want them seeing 55% d zone starts either. Good teams don't do that -- there's a reason his usage was like that (Gordon) on some of the worst teams in hockey. Ideally you can roll 4 lines and all can eat 2-way minutes and none are grossly used in any zone (of course you want top guys to see juicy o starts but not to the point of sheltering). If they can just not be sheltered and can do well or break even, that's a very good 4th. I think the team could be better, but the effect on Giroux is a bit overblown imo.

See, this is where I disagree. Marcus Kruger is fed DZ starts for breakfast, lunch, and dinner (57.6%). That allows players like Kane and Panarin to get huge OZ starts. And the almighty Toews has never really had heavy DZ starts for this reason. Having Kruger bear that responsibility opens up Toews, Kane, and Panarin to each do what they do best. I want to use Giroux and Voracek like Chicago uses Toews and Kane respectively. My sincere hope is that a Read-Gordon-Bellemarre line will make this possible.

 

[Rebels57]

Eh, that's not entirely accurate. Going from 25.5% OZ starts in 2014-15 to 27.32% last season is a decent margin over the course of a full year. Remember, 33% would be an even split across all three zones. A single percentage point isn't a trivial difference. It's not massive either, but for a player like Couturier, could a couple percentage points be the difference between 45 points and 50? Perhaps. Ideally, I'd want Couturier to be getting ~28% or so. Again, not looking for or expecting anything drastic.



See, this is where I disagree. Marcus Kruger is fed DZ starts for breakfast, lunch, and dinner (57.6%). That allows players like Kane and Panarin to get huge OZ starts. And the almighty Toews has never really had heavy DZ starts for this reason. Having Kruger bear that responsibility opens up Toews, Kane, and Panarin to each do what they do best. I want to use Giroux and Voracek like Chicago uses Toews and Kane respectively. My sincere hope is that a Read-Gordon-Bellemarre line will make this possible.

This.

 

[Tripod]

Yeah, not sure how anyone can look at Read, Gordon and Belle and not be happy with the upgrade over last years 4th line.

 

[Juicy Pop]

Eh, going from 25.5% OZ starts in 2014-15 to 27.32% last season is a decent margin over the course of a full year. Remember, 33% would be an even split across all three zones. A single percentage point isn't a trivial difference. It's not massive either, but for a player like Couturier, could a couple percentage points be the difference between 45 points and 50? Perhaps. Ideally, I'd want Couturier to be getting ~28% or so. Again, not looking for or expecting anything drastic.



See, this is where I disagree. Marcus Kruger is fed DZ starts for breakfast, lunch, and dinner (57.6%). That allows players like Kane and Panarin to get huge OZ starts. And the almighty Toews has never really had heavy DZ starts for this reason. Having Kruger bear that responsibility opens up Toews, Kane, and Panarin to each do what they do best. I want to use Giroux and Voracek like Chicago uses Toews and Kane respectively. My sincere hope is that a Read-Gordon-Bellemarre line will make this possible.

This.

 

[Magua]

Eh, going from 25.5% OZ starts in 2014-15 to 27.32% last season is a decent margin over the course of a full year. Remember, 33% would be an even split across all three zones. A single percentage point isn't a trivial difference. It's not massive either, but for a player like Couturier, could a couple percentage points be the difference between 45 points and 50? Perhaps. Ideally, I'd want Couturier to be getting ~28% or so. Again, not looking for or expecting anything drastic.

It's 20 faceoffs spread over 82 games (if he played 82 games). It's 1 more offensive faceoff every 4 games. Like I said, I don't think that drastically boosted his game. Adding another 10 faceoffs won't make a massive difference. Couturier can have the toughest usage imaginable, like Bergeron, and come out clean as a whistle as long as he has his caliber linemates. That's what makes those two pretty awesome. Obviously you want to keep it within reason.

See, this is where I disagree. Marcus Kruger is fed DZ starts for breakfast, lunch, and dinner (57.6%). That allows players like Kane and Panarin to get huge OZ starts. And the almighty Toews has never really had heavy DZ starts for this reason. Having Kruger bear that responsibility opens up Toews, Kane, and Panarin to each do what they do best. I want to use Giroux and Voracek like Chicago uses Toews and Kane respectively. My sincere hope is that a Read-Gordon-Bellemarre line will make this possible.

Fair point. But Kruger is also better all around and can see top competition too. So he gets the zone starts and the competition and can actually hold his own. It's why he's a good player. Personally, if I'm a coach it's still rather high. Your best players typically are your best players at getting it out of your own zone and maintaining possession too. I like a bit more balance. Those guys only see several more ES minutes a game than Kruger -- 11 minutes of ES time is enough to get shelled and cost games too. Kane and Panarin are also significantly worse than someone like Giroux as a two way player. They are legit sheltered. Toews sees more o zone faceoffs than G, but year to year it isn't a drastic percentage. Crosby doesn't see much better zone starts than G.

I'm not sure I trust Gordon to do that is what I'm saying. Really it's Rubtsov who can't get here soon enough. He's probably his golden ticket. And Coots's.

 

[Gert B Frobe]

I said the Flyers top 6 is thin, as evidenced by the fact that they don't even have 6 legitimate top 6 forwards. Many people want to argue that the Flyers' top 6 at ES isn't thin, and I just think that's wrong.

Maybe you don't need six legitimate top 6 forwards if 3 of them are superstars, but the only "superstar" this team has is Giroux and he isn't even a superstar at ES anymore.

Now, I wouldn't have signed any of the big name free agents for the top 6 this season, either. My point isn't that they should have signed one. My point is that these minor upgrades to the bottom six in Weise and Gordon over Gagner and White aren't going to have a big impact on improving a team that, for anyone who watched the playoffs, was woefully lacking speed, skill, and offense in the top 6, and whose best playoff line already was its fourth line.

It's also why I want Konecny on this team and believe he deserves to be on the team, just as Fabbri helped the Blues this season.

Those who think adding Dale Weise and Boyd Gordon are going to help this team improve from last season more than adding a high skill impact player to the top 6 I think are incredibly mistaken.

And I really worry that loading up on all of these veteran 3rd/4th line journeymen veterans does increase the risk of keeping the Flyers from adding a real rare talent and difference-maker like Konecny.

If you put the Flyers best 6 forwards on a team with a half decent defense and bottom two lines - and they're a lot better. How good would those 6 be with a defense that was actually fast, young and above average?

That top 6 played on a team with VandeVelde, White, Streit, Schultz, MacDonald, Manning, Medvedev, Bellemare, Gagner, Laughton, Read, Cousins... I think you're missing the point entirely - the top 6 are very good, not great, but the rest of the team, as a whole really, really sucked.