Realistic Expectations/Predictions

Appleyard

Registered User
Mar 5, 2010
31,793
41,243
Copenhagen
twitter.com
Mason:

2008-09 and Flyers career combined:

129GP, 70W, 40L, 14OT, 3624SA, 3327SV, 0.918 SV%, 14SO, 7528mins played

Rest of career:

171GP, 63W, 79L, 20OT, 4895SA, 4401SV, 0.899 SV%, 7SO, 9474mins played

So 44% of his career in minutes and 43% of his career in GP he has been putting up edge of ~top ten starter numbers...

another year around ~.918 and he will have played 55% of his career as a ~top 10 starter.

His game is very well rounded as well, big, very athletic, great post to post, fluid and balanced, great stickhandler, good blocker, quick glove... the only noticeable thing with him that is at times poor is hanging on to the puck with his glove... he will get there and it will go in and out. So long as his head is in the right place he should be an adequate starter at least.

Wearing undersized pads for over 2 seasons cannot have helped either!
 
Last edited:

Striiker

Earthquake Survivor
Jun 2, 2013
89,741
155,842
Pennsylvania
One can only imagine what Bernier or Schneider or Bobrovsky or Rask or Bishop's reputation would be if they were thrust into a position they were clearly not ready for at 20 years old. Few goalies are able to swim in the NHL at that age. Their growing pains are masked by the fact that they get to develop against easier competition as an NHL backup or starter in the AHL until they're 23, 24 or 25 (or in Schneider's case, 28 :shakehead).

The only argument you could have made against Mason was that perhaps there was some irreparable damage done to his game by his development track, but that was clearly debunked last season since he proved, at the very least, the level he is capable of playing at as a starter.

Masons own quotes have painted a pretty clear picture of what happened to him. He started off well, then had some hard times and since he was so young, inexperienced, and playing on a terrible team he had trouble getting out of the rut. It all just piled on and got worse and worse until he lost his motivation and every shred of confidence until he got depressed and questioned if he even wanted to play hockey anymore. Then he gets traded to a better team where they tell him they believe in him and his confidence and motivation start to come back. He starts playing better and that also gives him more and more confidence until he gets to where he is now. Mason is probably as focused, confident, and motivated as he's been in a long time, if not in his entire career.
 

CutOnDime97

Too Showman
Mar 29, 2008
15,589
9,786
Mason plays well and proves himself as a good starter. - Correct!
Umberger is better than Hartnell. - Very very wrong.
Laughton impresses. - Eh. Neither right nor wrong on this one due to injuries.
Lecavalier isn't that bad. - Wrong.

Emery sucks. - Correct!
MacDonald sucks. - I'd say correct here as well.

Flyers are in the hunt for last playoff spot. - They were in the hunt for a bit, but ultimately wrong.

Taking a look back......
 

Garbage Goal

Registered User
Apr 1, 2009
22,699
4,591
We win the Cup.

On a serious note I think Umberger proves to be a quality depth player sort of Read-lite in terms of his versatility. Proves that change of scenery can help, especially from Columbus a la Voracek and Mason. Also proves that Hartnell is a bit overrated since we get to finally see how this team fares with special teams when Hartnell is switched with someone decently desciplined.

Not correct, but not completely wrong either I thought. Umberger was injured and he was versatile in terms of the balance of his game it's just that he was also completely invisible.

About Hartnell, I was right on the disciplined part...I guess? Rest of it, I don't think I was wrong about us not needing him but I was definitely wrong about Hartnell being overrated.

We're a team that, when healthy should be making the playoffs and can say it with confidence (key word is should). Part of that is the huge disbalance between conferences, but still. We really can't afford injuries though. It was like that last season too, but we were actually very healthy last season. Lecavalier stuff, Downie stuff, and Mason was out for a bit right at the end of the season. Need the same kind of injury luck minus Mason getting injured. Giroux or Mason alone would sink this roster on paper if either went down with injury.

I honestly think I was right, especially since I emphasized should. I really want to see how having a competent coach (assuming Hakstol is) and having a competent to great GM (as Hextall appears to be) put his mark on the roster can change things.
 

tytech

Registered User
Jan 4, 2003
1,436
26
Ottawa
Visit site
Not correct, but not completely wrong either I thought. Umberger was injured and he was versatile in terms of the balance of his game it's just that he was also completely invisible.

About Hartnell, I was right on the disciplined part...I guess? Rest of it, I don't think I was wrong about us not needing him but I was definitely wrong about Hartnell being overrated.



I honestly think I was right, especially since I emphasized should. I really want to see how having a competent coach (assuming Hakstol is) and having a competent to great GM (as Hextall appears to be) put his mark on the roster can change things.

Ummm, you weren't right at all. You mentioned being healthy and mentioned players. You didn't mention coaching or GM in your last post. We had healthy players last year and sucked. You said we "should" be ok if our players were healthy. You weren't right at all. Sorry to point it out but I like to call a spade a spade.
 

Garbage Goal

Registered User
Apr 1, 2009
22,699
4,591
Ummm, you weren't right at all. You mentioned being healthy and mentioned players. You didn't mention coaching or GM in your last post. We had healthy players last year and sucked. You said we "should" be ok if our players were healthy. You weren't right at all. Sorry to point it out but I like to call a spade a spade.

My point is that the biggest thing that sunk this team in many people's eyes (coaching in general and systematic changes to the PK) weren't really foreseeable and weren't mentioned in my post. Thus why I said "should" because **** like that is unpredictable which is why it wasn't mentioned.
 

Random Forest

Registered User
May 12, 2010
14,453
995
My point is that the biggest thing that sunk this team in many people's eyes (coaching in general and systematic changes to the PK) weren't really foreseeable and weren't mentioned in my post. Thus why I said "should" because **** like that is unpredictable which is why it wasn't mentioned.

A lot of people predicted that the housing market "should" keep climbing in 2008. Doesn't mean those weren't spectacular fails of predictions though.

A prediction is a good one precisely because it successfully predicts the seemingly unpredictable (not that mine was any better).
 

tytech

Registered User
Jan 4, 2003
1,436
26
Ottawa
Visit site
My point is that the biggest thing that sunk this team in many people's eyes (coaching in general and systematic changes to the PK) weren't really foreseeable and weren't mentioned in my post. Thus why I said "should" because **** like that is unpredictable which is why it wasn't mentioned.

Easy to say now but originally you never mentioned that your prediction could be based on "any" unforseable or unpredicatable circumstances. That would be a huge catch all and not much of a prediction considering that anything but a cup would allow you coming back a year later to brag about how accurate you were and allow you to use any example.

However, you didn't and instead specifically mentioned that if we stay healthy we would be ok. We were healthy and we were not ok.

My issue is that a year later you are trying to pat yourself on the back by saying you were accurate in your prediction because an unpredicatable event (coaching) is what took this team down. Coaching is a completely different dynamic to your only original prediction of health being a factor.

Not trying to be such a cynic but you brought this on yourself by claiming that your predicition (health) was accurate, when it wasn't at all.
 

Jtown

Registered User
Oct 6, 2010
39,612
19,672
Fairfax, Virginia
Giroux - PPG season. People say it's a down year, but he's still the motor that runs this team. The drop will be the result of natural variance and a PP that struggles to gel early in the year.
Voracek - 70-75 points, 30 goal season and leading goal scorer. Takes a step forward, and some fans will suggest he may even be better than Giroux (though it will still remain crazy talk)
Schenn - Gets his spot on the top line but not immediately. When he's there, he goes on a tear and puts up between 25-30g with 60ish points. People start to like him. He also is one of the only bright spots of the PP1 unit early in the year.

Couturier - Starts off real slow, but gets hot somewhere midway through the season and maintains a decent pace until the end. Finishes with 45-50 points.
Read - Same as Couturier. Slow start, but picks it up when the lines get jumbled in November/December, and maintains reasonable production throughout. Finishes with 40 points.
Simmonds - Scapegoated for a while. His PP production drops off, and he is somewhat exposed. Has a down year in terms of production, but still does a decent amount of stuff to finish in the good books by the end. Has just under 50 points to end the year.

Lecavalier - Actually bounces back and remains healthy for quite a while. People are very pleased with him, but he gets injured in February but manages to come back hot down the stretch. Plays 64 games and has 45 points.
Raffl - Gets bounced around the lineup a lot, but does admirably, though goes through stretches of poor play where fans get annoyed. Develops some more offensive ability, but fans ignore it because he seems very disengaged and sloppy at times. Hits 30 points.
Umberger - Makes us satisfied with the Hartnell deal, but still frustrated at his deteriorating ability at times. Becomes a solid warrior and fits well in Berube's system. Puts up 45 points thanks to taking Simmonds's spot on PP1 for a little while when he's cold.

Bellemarre - A guy that the fans fall in love with, but Berube never gives a fair chance to. Becomes the new Gustafsson. He's a healthy scratch for most of the year making many of us pull our hair out. Has 20ish points despite playing around 50 games.
White - Does a similar as Hall last year, but he becomes one of Berube's favorites and placed in roles he can't handle which makes fans hate him even though it's not his fault. Not a lot of production.
Rinaldo - Will play too much, get more top nine time than he should even dream of getting. Will perform better than last year and even bury a handful of goals, but will still be a bad hockey player.

Laughton - Makes the team out of camp with a monster of a preseason. Impresses everyone with his steadiness, though he does nothing spectacular. Gets top nine time when injuries hit Lecavalier, and Laughton does very well, but is ultimately relegated back to the fourth line upon VL's return.


Coburn - Steady year. Fans will start to appreciate him more. He actually hits 25 points despite missing a handful of games.
Streit - Takes a step back and doesn't duplicate Timonen's effectiveness on the PP and chemistry with Giroux. Eventually loses the spot to Gostisbehere. We get frustrated with him, but his 5v5 offensive numbers still look good, and he finishes the season with his reputation still in tact but not where it is now. Finishes just at or just under 40 points.

MacDonald - Comes out of the gate on fire, and we all start to love him. His game takes a turn for the worse a couple months in, and we're all hating him by the end, but he won't be quite as bad as his detractors will suggest. 25 point finish.
Grossmann - Steady. Not nearly as bad as he was last year, but nothing good either. Does his job quietly but opinions will be mixed.

Del Zotto - Gets PP1 time when Streit flops there. MDZ fares no better. Does an okay job at 5v5 with extremely sheltered minutes, and is a catalyst for some offense, but he is very inconsistent and fans will hate him for it.
LSchenn - He will be good to start the year, but will be traded by Christmas, and we will actually like the return (a 2015 1st from a contending team in need of a PKer).

Gostisbehere - Kills it in the AHL in October. Gets spotty NHL action for minor injuries early in the season and looks ****ing awesome. Is sent back, but then gets a permanent spot when LSchenn is traded, and becomes a second-pairing fixture the rest of the way alongside Grossmann. He eventually gets the PP1 job and runs with it. Has a year very similar to pre-Norris Subban and hits 30 points in only 61 games.
Schultz - Hardly sees action. Gets more involved late in the season when injuries pile up, but he's never in the lineup with consistency.


Mason - Has a very, very strong season even better than the one he just had. Becomes a major pillar for the team's success.
Emery - Not quite as bad as last year, but still not close to good.


Fairly optimistic. I think the team will exceed many people's expectations and finish comfortably in the playoffs and second in the division (to the Rangers!). The team will be led by the top line which shows lots of chemistry and Mason who will be the backbone of our success and earn back lots of praise around the league.

Ghost will be the biggest surprise, and fans will adore him by the end of the year. His emergence will be a big mid-season boost.

I also get the feeling that a struggling PP1 unit will be a major theme for the first half of the year.

this has to go down as one of the worst predictions on this board. The only thing you got right was mason. :laugh:
 

Random Forest

Registered User
May 12, 2010
14,453
995
this has to go down as one of the worst predictions on this board. The only thing you got right was mason. :laugh:

Actually this has exactly to do with what I said a couple posts up. The only predictions that are impressive are the ones that successfully predict the surprises, imo. It's more impressive for someone to predict Benn winning the Art Ross than it is for someone to predict Ovechkin winning the Richard. For that reason, each year, my predictions are pretty wild as I try to randomly guess what that year's big story will be. Nobody would have predicted Mark Stone to win the Calder or Benn to win the scoring race, for example, so I try to make those wild guesses in the hopes that I can somehow actually guess what the year's big surprise will be.

Unsurprisingly, many of my predictions are spectacular failures, but when I hit on one, you'll call me a prophet for calling something so random. :laugh:

Also, my predictions were extremely specific, so that leaves less room for error than those who dealt in broad vagueries. For example, if I had just said that Giroux would have a down year and Voracek a very strong one, it would appear more accurate even if it's more or less what I already said.

Additionally, I still stand by my comments about Gostisbehere. I think he would have made the team full time at some point had he not been injured, and I do believe he would have given the team a sizable boost. I'll probably make that same prediction this year.
 
Last edited:

Rebels57

Former Flyers fan
Sponsor
Sep 28, 2014
76,757
123,325
this has to go down as one of the worst predictions on this board. The only thing you got right was mason. :laugh:

He was pretty accurate with Voracek. He took a step forward and some did start to suggest hes better than Giroux.

He was pretty spot on with Raffl. He bounced around the lineup a bit, finished with around 30 points and improved his offensive game.
 

Jtown

Registered User
Oct 6, 2010
39,612
19,672
Fairfax, Virginia
You laugh yet some of it was very accurate. You probably laugh because of the couturier prediction and your disdain for him

What was accurate?

I laugh because he predicted every player and basically only got 1 right. Its horrible luck because thats all these predicitons really are . Eklund wouldve atleast gotten 2 right.

Coots is one of my fav players on the flyers actually.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad