GM Chuck Fletcher v4

[flyersfan187]

Crosby and Malkin can play together. Bylsma used to do that a lot. But having two very good lines makes more sense than having one great line and trash. Just like having three good D pairs makes more sense.

Better to play them apart mostly and put them together in limited situations. Spreading out the lineup is key if you have the right players on your team to do it so you can get better matchups. Which is why Hayes will be huge for the Flyers because either the Hayes line or the Patrick line will get weak matchups in a lot of games.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

"Sheltered" as a concept needs to start taking Quality of Teammates into account. We know enough to say that.

I get what's been learned over the past 50 years and that change is slow, but it matters reasonably more than QualComp. Exactly how much more is of course up for debate.

 

[TCTC]

Better to play them apart mostly and put them together in limited situations. Spreading out the lineup is key if you have the right players on your team to do it so you can get better matchups. Which is why Hayes will be huge for the Flyers because either the Hayes line or the Patrick line will get weak matchups in a lot of games.

Exactly. Depth is important. For forwards and defense, too.

 

[Striiker]

Okay. See the bolded and underlined. It's so hard to follow along with these new measures of time in place...

So if our top 4 plays like 20+ inches each TOI and our bottom 2 plays, what?

Please help @Striiker

Whatever’s left.

It might depend on what the special teams situation looks like in each individual game or how the end of the game shakes out (winning? Losing? Tied?).

But Ghost or Sanheims usage should be the guarantee, not dependent on what the others do. See how Provorovs usage never suffered last year? That’s how these two should be treated.

 

[baudib1]

If Braun and Niskanen aren't expected to play key roles, why are we spending $11M in cap and putting them in the top 4?

We made our top 2 pairs worse. The contortions people are making to justify these moves are hilarious.

 

[Rebels57]

Ghost will almost certainly start the season on the 3rd pair. Him and Myers played relatively well together last season, so it makes sense.

Honestly based on the players we have, all 3 pairs should get similar TOI at 5V5 next season. Shouldnt be more than 1 minute separating each pair if I had it my way. Then let special teams sort out the rest of the TOI.

 

[blinds]

That's a lot of wasted debate over artificial rankings. It really doesn't matter if anyone is "top 4" or 3rd pairing if they're seeing similar ice time, which they will. This is going to be the first year in awhile where we don't have a pairing that's a glaring weakness that needs to be protected.

The real differentiator is going to be who gets on what special teams unit. The only guarantee is Ghost on PP1.

 

[Tripod]

Honestly based on the players we have, all 3 pairs should get similar TOI at 5V5 next season. Shouldnt be more than 1 minute separating each pair if I had it my way. Then let special teams sort out the rest of the TOI.

like

 

[Magua]

Honestly based on the players we have, all 3 pairs should get similar TOI at 5V5 next season. Shouldnt be more than 1 minute separating each pair if I had it my way.

 

[Rebels57]

Summer is where dreams are born. Fall is where they die.

 

[FLYguy3911]

There are 4 forward lines and 3 D pairs, so comparing their TOI doesn't make much sense anyway.
The idea of stacking your top 4 is interesting, but should only be used in specific situations, imo.

You're saying it's okay to stack your top 6 F, but you need to have 3 balanced D pairs. Where is the logic in that? Yeah you don't want trash like Hagg on your bottom pair, the same way you don't want Goulbourne or Bailey on your 4th line, but the best strategy is always to play your best players....with your best players. Look what happens in the playoffs. Bottom pairs are getting ~10 minutes a game.

Gostisbehere on the 3rd pair won't last long. He's either going to prove that he's too good for that role, or he's going to be considered too much of a luxury at 4.5 to occupy a spot on the 3rd pair.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Seems pretty likely to me they’ll start the season with
Provorov-Niskanen
Sanheim-Braun
Ghost-Myers

 

[blinds]

delete

 

[Outlaw Samurai]

"Sheltered" as a concept needs to start taking Quality of Teammates into account. We know enough to say that.

I get what's been learned over the past 50 years and that change is slow, but it matters reasonably more than QualComp. Exactly how much more is of course up for debate.

Jojo I always enjoy and appreciate your posts

 

[Striiker]

I ask again: does anyone here want it put Giroux or Couts on the 3rd/4th line, for depth and matchup problems or because they’d dominate the lesser competition?

I would hope the answer is “no”.

It’s the same concept with Ghost. You play your best players, as much as they can handle, with as much help as you can give them. That’s why the Provorov-Ghost top pair, playing with the Giroux-Couturier-TK top line, dominated and carried us to the playoffs. It was the only time Hakstol didn’t get in his own way and let the players play.

 

[Adam Warlock]

I ask again: does anyone here want it put Giroux or Couts on the 3rd/4th line, for depth and matchup problems or because they’d dominate the lesser competition?

I would hope the answer is “no”.

It’s the same concept with Ghost. You play your best players, as much as they can handle, with as much help as you can give them. That’s why the Provorov-Ghost top pair, playing with the Giroux-Couturier-TK top line, dominated and carried us to the playoffs. It was the only time Hakstol didn’t get in his own way and let the players play.

I would love to see...

Provy-Ghost
Sanheim-Myers
Morin-Niskanen
Braun

...as our D by the end of next season. That would say all the young D are playing well and that the coaches get it.

 

[Striiker]

I would love to see...

Provy-Ghost
Sanheim-Myers
Morin-Niskanen
Braun

...as our D by the end of next season. That would say all the young D are playing well and that the coaches get it.

That would be pretty amazing but I doubt that happens unless they change their mind and hire me as coach.

 

[Rich Nixon]

I would love to see...

Provy-Ghost
Sanheim-Myers
Morin-Niskanen
Braun

...as our D by the end of next season. That would say all the young D are playing well and that the coaches get it.

Next season as in 19-20 or 20-21?

I kinda expect Myers to replace Braun on the second pairing by like January this year, in an ideal world.

I ask again: does anyone here want it put Giroux or Couts on the 3rd/4th line, for depth and matchup problems or because they’d dominate the lesser competition?

I would hope the answer is “no”.

It’s the same concept with Ghost. You play your best players, as much as they can handle, with as much help as you can give them.

I don't want to use the word "fallacy" because it isn't that, so I'll just go with "position": the position at the heart of your argument here is that Ghost is the best or second-best defenseman on the team. That's not one that everyone shares.

There's arguments to be made in each direction, and it comes down to priorities. Ghost is a really weird player. A homeless man's Karlsson or a billionaire's Del Zotto, let's say.

Ghost is really good at what he's really good at, and he's not downright bad at anything else. Very good at defending the rush, incredible on the breakout, obviously a beast in the offensive zone when he's on his game. His in-zone defense is a bit lacking: He tends to lose position and he's not phenomenal in the trenches. If I had to give you a forward comparable, I'd say Kessel is a good one. Fantastic player, but there's areas where you're just not sure he's ever going to be complete.

Unlike for forwards, though, a defenseman has got to be really, really well-rounded to be one of the best defenders on your team. Ghost does things no other Flyers defenseman can do, and what only a handful of others in the league can do. He also is worse at things that literally dozens of lesser players can handle.

The disconnect is that many of us don't see him as an all-situations defenseman, and that's not to say we don't love the guy.

Which is why the argument on the other side is to utilize his strengths, still find a way to get him 20 minutes, but let sturdier defenders handle harder defensive assignments and use him where he'll shine. His career TOI average is right around 20 minutes, with about 15:30+ of that at ES and 3:30+ on the PP. Nearly 50% of his points come on the PP. If you have him specialized like that, you'll still get a ton of production out of him, probably more durability, and you'll be in good shape no matter what happens.

Not trying to change your mind about anything, because your mind is unchangeable--part of your youthful beauty. That's just kinda where the divide is. I'd be all for playing him like the top defenseman on the team if I saw him as that, but I don't really know where to rank him. His skillset is hard to pigeonhole.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

No one has to be well-rounded to be the best anything. That's indefensible. Bias masquerading as fact, not even trying to hide it.

 

[Rich Nixon]

No one has to be well-rounded to be the best anything. That's indefensible. Bias masquerading as fact, not even trying to hide it.

For a person who has previously accused me of condescending, this one's a molotov. No shit there's bias, every last post on a f***ing message board is typically dripping with that, because it's a discussion (eh, argument) about things entirely out of all of our control and mostly above our pay grades. We're explaining why we think the things we do.

I explained a position. That post begins and ends with an acknowledgment that they're differing positions. That's all any of us are really ever doing. I think like 10% of all the sentences and 35% of the paragraphs I write on here begin with the phrase "I think." That's not a mistake or a habit.

I understand it's a position you don't agree with, but "bias masquerading as fact" is how you can describe 99% of mankind's written product. Seriously, glass houses.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

For a person who has previously accused me of condescending, this one's a molotov. No **** there's bias, every last post on a ****ing message board is typically dripping with that, because it's a discussion (eh, argument) about things entirely out of all of our control and mostly above our pay grades. We're explaining why we think the things we do.

I explained a position. That post begins and ends with an acknowledgment that they're differing positions. That's all any of us are really ever doing. I think like 10% of all the sentences and 35% of the paragraphs I write on here begin with the phrase "I think." That's not a mistake or a habit.

I understand it's a position you don't agree with, but "bias masquerading as fact" is how you can describe 99% of mankind's written product. Seriously, glass houses.

You made an absolutely absurd statement that deserves the most possible scorn. It's worse than faulty logic.

Yes, almost all of the millions of words we waste on here should be prefaced with "I think." Except this. Your best Defenseman is the one whose sum total is the highest. Define sum total how you want. Disagree with specific player evaluations. All of that is fine and opinion. Just don't tell me that because you find one particular area to be deficient by a non-specific degree, it trumps everything else.

For the record, we're both condescending.

 

[Rich Nixon]

You made an absolutely absurd statement that deserves the most possible scorn.

Dude, I made a relatively non-controversial claim about hockey players. I also gave a litany of reasons for my position. This is downright obnoxious.

Illustrate the counter-position, give examples, discuss the point. Don't slide your glasses to the tip of your nose and purse your lips to lecture about the dialectics of HF etiquette.

I'm having a back-and-forth with someone who unequivocally asserted that a player was one of the two best defensemen on the team, but that's not "bias masquerading as fact" or "deserving of the most possible scorn"?

 

[Ghosts Beer]

You made an absolutely absurd statement that deserves the most possible scorn. It's worse than faulty logic.

Yes, almost all of the millions of words we waste on here should be prefaced with "I think." Except this. Your best Defenseman is the one whose sum total is the highest. Define sum total how you want. Disagree with specific player evaluations. All of that is fine and opinion. Just don't tell me that because you find one particular area to be deficient by a non-specific degree, it trumps everything else.

For the record, we're both condescending.

There's a lot of irony here. You're criticizing him for treating something as fact that you disagree with, and then you are stating something as fact that is simply your opinion. I think (my opinion) that it's perfectly acceptable for someone to believe that a team's best defenseman needs to be able to play the hardest defensive minutes and can't just be the equivalent of a fifth forward. But there's no definitively right or wrong answer here.

 

[bobbythebrain]

Summer is where dreams are born. Fall is where they die.

Shakespeare?

 

[JojoTheWhale]

Dude, I made a relatively non-controversial claim about hockey players. I also gave a litany of reasons for my position. This is downright obnoxious.

Illustrate the counter-position, give examples, discuss the point. Don't slide your glasses to the tip of your nose and purse your lips to lecture about the dialectics of HF etiquette.

I'm having a back-and-forth with someone who unequivocally asserted that a player was one of the two best defensemen on the team, but that's not "bias masquerading as fact" or "deserving of the most possible scorn"?

I don't care if you or anyone else thinks Gostisbehere is better than X or Y. That's not interesting to me.

What interests me is process. I object to yours because it makes no sense and explained why. How you take that is on you. Feel free to ignore it or me. It's all good.