Curufinwe
Registered User
- Feb 28, 2013
- 55,756
- 42,791
Just getting rid of Carter wasn't dismantling anything.
Signing Bryzgalov and losing Pronger was the real problem.
Just getting rid of Carter wasn't dismantling anything.
Signing Bryzgalov and losing Pronger was the real problem.
The team lost Pronger in '10-'11 and the Richards/Carter led team went 7 games with an average Buffalo team and was swept by Boston. We likely would have been better with Richards/Carter these past 2 years, but the team still wouldn't be a legitimate contender.
The team is in a better position today than it would have been without those deals.
Beef Invictus
Revolutionary Positivity
Yeah, homer had dug himself a deep hole. If those trades don't go down...imagine what the roster would look like.
Or, just go back and look at the rosters people were proposing in 2011, the ones that didn't involve any trades at all were simply brutal.
Or, just go back and look at the rosters people were proposing in 2011, the ones that didn't involve any trades at all were simply brutal.
4thline4life
Registered User
- Jul 12, 2010
- 2,796
- 1
The Richards/carter led team was the best team in the league by far until injuries hit. Not to mention lavys coaching those playoff series was atrocious. To say they wouldnt be a legitimate contenders is pretty much just hating on those two.
BrindamoursNose
Registered User
- Oct 14, 2008
- 20,136
- 14,255
The Edmonton thing is silly. Just because they're a disaster doesn't mean we are or are going to be.
We have defensemen that are not old, but not very young. I don't see what's wrong with a Coburn or Grossman or Meszaros at 28-29 years (other than I hate Meszaros). You can not count Gustafsson all you want, but he counts. Bourdon was in the mix, but got a career-ending concussion basically. We drafted Sbisa, but traded him for Chris effing Pronger (along with a few 1sts, which might help stunt our D pool).
We have drafted and developed defensemen. Either we don't keep them or they just weren't that good. Just some guys I'm thinking of include Sbisa, Pitkanen, Meyer, Gustafsson (he counts), Seidenberg...those are off the top of my head. Now I know that isn't great, but I don't want to hear we don't draft or develop any. Your whole argument/frustration is that Homer doesn't get players on ELCs to win championships.
Personally? I don't care how it's done. I sure wouldn't have been complaining if Homer had acquired Weber to that insane deal. Talent is talent. I don't care about the $ or age. Would young and cheap be nice? Absolutely, but you can't have it all.
Funny you bring up Pittsburgh, actually. I think they went to the Finals twice with defensive pieces not a lot better than what we have now. They have a pretty similar D at the moment, actually.
We're heading in a good direction. Homer has made some pretty spot-on decisions lately. Only one I'd give him crap for is signing Streit. Even so? I don't care. It improved the team. Between signing Lecavalier, Emery, trading for Mason and Downie, drafting Morin/Hagg...I'm thrilled with Homer lately.
So to summarize...you believe drafting/keeping young, cheap defensemen will win us a championship and Homer doesn't do that (right?). Well, it seems he's on the path of doing just that. I don't disagree with your hypothesis, btw. It's very solid. But I don't believe it's the ONLY way to win. You just never know.
Curufinwe
Registered User
- Feb 28, 2013
- 55,756
- 42,791
zarley zelepukin
Registered User
The 2011 team was pretty clearly running out of gas after going deep in the playoffs the year before- not the only team that's happened to. Besides, that series against Buffalo would have been over in 5 if we had an actual goalie. Game 2 against Boston was the last straw- we outplayed them and Thomas stole it. Facing another 0-2 hole, knowing we'd have to severely outplay a really good team because of the difference in net, and run down from playing a lot of hockey, they gave out.
Having those guys the last couple years would have made a huge difference. Dunno if they could have found some way to replace Pronger enough (maybe through trade) that they could have won a Cup, but they definitely would have been closer to getting one. And that goes for this year too, and probably the next couple years at least.
Embiid
Off IR for now
The locker room was divided with Richards and Carter and the vets on the other side. It wasn't a healthy environment. Even Richards said there were "little groups" in the locker room when describing the difference between LA and Philly.
Basically, all this revisionist talk of what could have been is misleading since management had taken the position that they weren't going to fire another coach despite the fact that Lavi was just as responsible for the Boston debacle as some of the players which did include Richards. I mean Tocchet was calling Richards out during intermissions and post game saying he needed to show more whether it was fair or not.
Anyway..the point is that even if they had decided to keep Richards and Carter ..it would have meant they would have had to have chosen to fire the coach. If that had happened then yeah maybe we would have seen something better and all other sorts of other things may have happened like keeping Bob etc. It's really impossible to know though.
My issue is not that they made the decision to trade Carter and Richards which Holmgren did a pretty decent job with as far as the returns...it's the disasters that followed that set the team back. Couple it with the trading away of draft picks which they admitted didn't help and you have last season's futility and thus far this season's mediocrity. Again Holmgren basically didn't follow up his big trade properly..
Basically, all this revisionist talk of what could have been is misleading since management had taken the position that they weren't going to fire another coach despite the fact that Lavi was just as responsible for the Boston debacle as some of the players which did include Richards. I mean Tocchet was calling Richards out during intermissions and post game saying he needed to show more whether it was fair or not.
Anyway..the point is that even if they had decided to keep Richards and Carter ..it would have meant they would have had to have chosen to fire the coach. If that had happened then yeah maybe we would have seen something better and all other sorts of other things may have happened like keeping Bob etc. It's really impossible to know though.
My issue is not that they made the decision to trade Carter and Richards which Holmgren did a pretty decent job with as far as the returns...it's the disasters that followed that set the team back. Couple it with the trading away of draft picks which they admitted didn't help and you have last season's futility and thus far this season's mediocrity. Again Holmgren basically didn't follow up his big trade properly..
Beef Invictus
Revolutionary Positivity
Choosing the aging, breaking down Pronger over Carter and Richards was a bad idea. Recklessly emptying the prospect pool until the team was dangling over a cliff was an even worse idea.
One of those problems can be resolved by getting both sides to act like mature professionals, assuming it wasn't thoroughly overblown by our idiotic media(it probably was). The other could only be solved by blowing up the team.
One of those problems can be resolved by getting both sides to act like mature professionals, assuming it wasn't thoroughly overblown by our idiotic media(it probably was). The other could only be solved by blowing up the team.
zarley zelepukin
Registered User
All true. But I mean, what team would choose a coach over it's best players while they're in the prime of their careers? That never made sense. And Holmgren did get good returns, but the trades still set us back. We have to wait for the young guys we got to develop, which was pretty clear from day 1. There was no way the players we got in return could step in and immediately replace the ones we traded.
Since then, he's made some good moves and he's made some mistakes. Setting aside the Carter/Richards trades, I'm not sure his win% is good enough to justify keeping the job, but in very recent history I think he's done well. Getting Mason kinda/sorta makes up for blowing it with Bob/Bryz and I liked bringing in Downie and Lecavalier.
Embiid
Off IR for now
It made sense in the context of the Flyers having a very high turnover of coaches...they made another ultimatum ..prolly with Snider's influence to get rid of players instead this time around. This is the problem with diktats and absolutes..like with the goalie/Bryz ultimatum. You saw it again after they fired Lavi...Snider said they were going to see what players were "overrated" if they kept losing...
GKJ
Global Moderator
- Feb 27, 2002
- 187,243
- 39,286
The Penguins defensive pieces, still didn't cost that much. And they needed them.
One important qualifier I used in talking about the defenseman was "system-developed long-term defensemen." You make those trades with Sbisa (who I loved when we drafted, but was way overrated, and still is by some people here). The ultimate problem is that the Flyers did not have the depth or assets behind that trade, and it burned us, and may have cost us a Cup. Keep in mind, his managing of contracts has been brutal, too. We gave up an extra 1st because we signed Lupul a year before we needed to.
Meyer flamed out pretty hard core after leaving (not unlike Randy Jones). And I always thought he was better than Jones, but still did well in trading him. Pitkanen was traded more because the team felt like he was a mental midget. But Pitkanen was not holding up to that Norris-hopeful calibre. And even at that, if the Flyers don't think someone is going to be who they thought they would be (even if it meant being a decent player), they're gone. Saw it with Downie the first time around.
But the big one is Seidenberg. Because you're right. They did the right things with him. And then, because Ken Hitchcock is clueless on how to handle young players, he was traded for Petr Nedved. They didn't have the foresight to keep him, and he likely would have had the chance to find his niche once Kim Johnsson left. Which is why I said 'system-developed, long-term defensemen.' They don't do it. You might not care about the $ or age, but you should, because the Flyers only get them after other teams decide they don't want to pay them. They're not available otherwise, because teams aren't dumb enough to let them leave. That's why Weber didn't leave.
With how this team has done this season and last season in goal scoring I don't know how anyone can say our forwards or even our team is something special when results say they're clearly not at the moment.
Appleyard
Registered User
The shot % is absurdly low though tbh... ~7.2% after that game.
Of our regular players every one but Lecav, Coburn and Schenn are below their career average. That is pretty crazy really.
The average is ~9%.
Last two years with pretty similar personnel have been 9.8% and 9.4%.
If they were shooting at 9.6% (~average over last two year) they would have 75 goals instead of 57.
If they were shooting at league average they would have 71 goals instead of 57.
Ofc some of this is the chance creation... but everyone here has seen how many easy chances players have missed this year. I don't think I saw so many pings an EN misses in 48 games last season.
That's all well and true, but I can't figure out anyone in our forward group that isn't performing to their abilities. Guys like Hartnell and Simmonds are really disappointing right now but they're also not the kind of guys expected to carry offense or snipe goals or even be a catalyst. They're more meant for burying garbage, contributing in the lockerroom, and providing that net front presence on the PP. Last season Voracek had an absurdly good season that way way above what he's usually done in his other seasons.
Not sure if you understand what I mean, but whatever. I get that we aren't getting a lot of puck luck and that the shooting percentage is low, but I also feel like this isn't a forward group designed to succeed and isn't as impressive on ice as it is on paper.
There's also the fact that even if they did have 71 goals and that league average shooting percentage that would still only be good enough for 19th place in the league. I also feel like it's hard to blame two straight seasons of poor goal production solely on shooting percentage.
It's also worth noting that our D isn't good enough for our offense to even be average or middle of the pack.
Appleyard
Registered User
I know exactly what you mean... there are some holes in it at this present moment, some created atm by player decline (Hartnell, and heck, Briere... he needed to be rid of but his decline last year hurt them, he went from a 60-70 point guy to a defensively useless guy with little O and no return almost overnight, though Lecav has replaced him really, so that is kind of a moot point) and some by guys not playing to a previous level (Simmonds, Voracek).
Simmonds, Voracek and Hartnell should really be getting 45, 60-70 and 50 points each... that looks a remote possibility at this point.
In addition to that this team tries to be far to cute in almost all situations, (the top two lines are the main culprits.) when they were playing well over that 8-9 games stretch (I thought they were fine vs Florida) they were shooting far more often.
But the puck luck has not helped them at all either.
I do think a good LW would be a pretty much 'magic' fix for the top 9 though... it is just getting one that is the problem... unless Schenn can continue to develop this year and be a 30-30 winger soon.
Depends on what you mean by a fix. If you mean having a real chance at a Cup then that would take more then just one player short of it being a huge player. It's also not even seeming likely we make the playoffs, but that's besides the point.
In an ideal world I'd see Hartnell moved for whatever as Simmonds is younger and does everything he does better for the most part. I'd also keep Schenn at the 2C position and see how Lecavalier goes. If he keeps getting injured or keeps being a two-way liability and not delivering on the dot while not being a great presence in scoring contributions then he's not worth holding on to. Especially with that contract. Then figure out someone to bring in who can score goals without it having to be a garbage type goal and preferably able to play a two-way game.
That's in an ideal world though. As is Hartnell is hard to move because he's such a big part of the Flyers identity and at least used to be such a fan favorite but also because of the NTC. Lecavalier contract is something nobody is going to want to take if he doesn't improve somewhat and getting an impact winger like that would cost something good. Not Hartnell.
In an ideal world I'd see Hartnell moved for whatever as Simmonds is younger and does everything he does better for the most part. I'd also keep Schenn at the 2C position and see how Lecavalier goes. If he keeps getting injured or keeps being a two-way liability and not delivering on the dot while not being a great presence in scoring contributions then he's not worth holding on to. Especially with that contract. Then figure out someone to bring in who can score goals without it having to be a garbage type goal and preferably able to play a two-way game.
That's in an ideal world though. As is Hartnell is hard to move because he's such a big part of the Flyers identity and at least used to be such a fan favorite but also because of the NTC. Lecavalier contract is something nobody is going to want to take if he doesn't improve somewhat and getting an impact winger like that would cost something good. Not Hartnell.
Crescent Street
Saturday Nite Hockey
Not signing Jagr for the extra half million or million he was asking for is looking dumber and dumber. I truly believe his presence alone would have generated somewhere around an extra 6-8 goals. This would've helped turn the tide in a lot of these games made tight by above average goal tending. (for once)
Last edited:
BackToTheBrierePatch
Nope not today.
Holmgren has admitted that letting Jagr walk was a mistake. I think many of us thought they would still be fine offensively even with Jagr walking away.
i think trading JVR on top of that that offseason even with as much as he drove us crazy with his inconsistencies was almost as big of a mistake. I like Luke and all but the offense took a big hit that offseason. Of course many players were coming off career years so a drop off was expected. I didnt think a drop off to the level we saw was expected.
I still think a deal is going to have to be made. Hartnell,Simmonds, Downie. One of those 3 is going to have to go I think. I doubt they are going to trade Hartnell. for one i doubt you could get any kind of return for him right now and 2 the organization loves him. Probably the only logical move really is to deal Simmonds and another piece to get a scoring winger.
I think Simmer is likely the odd man out if you are looking to bring back Downie.
i think trading JVR on top of that that offseason even with as much as he drove us crazy with his inconsistencies was almost as big of a mistake. I like Luke and all but the offense took a big hit that offseason. Of course many players were coming off career years so a drop off was expected. I didnt think a drop off to the level we saw was expected.
I still think a deal is going to have to be made. Hartnell,Simmonds, Downie. One of those 3 is going to have to go I think. I doubt they are going to trade Hartnell. for one i doubt you could get any kind of return for him right now and 2 the organization loves him. Probably the only logical move really is to deal Simmonds and another piece to get a scoring winger.
I think Simmer is likely the odd man out if you are looking to bring back Downie.
DecadesofFutility
Registered User
My issue with trading Carter and Richards was that if Holmgen wanted to blowup the team, they needed to address the pilons that compose our defense.
First, the needed a better goalie option than Breezbyglov.
Second, they needed to retool their defense with some of the assets they received from the trades.
But, Holmgren focused on offense ignoring the holes on the backend.
Another Centerman was a luxury pick at #1, not a need based on their defensive ineptitude.
Third, JVR needed to be traded for a forward, or an offensive defenseman.
Luke Schenn is neither and should not have been considered a good option,
he is too slow to be added to our other slow defensemen.
Holmgren screwed this rebuild up and should have been fired before Lavi.
Last edited:
kelmitchell
Registered User
lol at the guy who Said joni pitkanen and dennis sidenberg were bad here....u must have been blind we were voodoo stupid to let joni walk away he was one of our best dmen at the time and is a solid #3 dman
Beef Invictus
Revolutionary Positivity
Pronger, Timonen, Carle, Coburn, and Mez were pylons in 2011? In what universe? That was widely considered one of the top defensive groups in the league at the time, because it WAS one of the top defensive groups in the league. If you think they were a bunch of pylons, I'd love to know what you thought of the rest of the league. There was little reason to worry about immediately re-tooling the defense, especially since the forward group blowup meant that DID need to be addressed immediately.
dats81
Registered User
Homer has made a lot of good decisions over the last 12 months.
The jury is still out on the draft picks but all recent trades and signings except for term on the Streit contract were really solid.
With players we always talk about current performance and tend to ignore the past. A GM's job is much tougher as he is always held accountable for things that happened years ago.
The jury is still out on the draft picks but all recent trades and signings except for term on the Streit contract were really solid.
With players we always talk about current performance and tend to ignore the past. A GM's job is much tougher as he is always held accountable for things that happened years ago.
