terp

In case you missed these nuggets:

From The Athletic:

On Nov. 17, former Flyers and current special advisors to the hockey operations department John LeClair and Patrick Sharp were at Boston College’s Kelley Rink to catch prospect Cutter Gauthier play against the University of Connecticut.

Gauthier had a memorable evening. He scored the game-tying goal in the third period and then again in overtime to help the Eagles defeat the Huskies, 5-4.

Sharp and LeClair met with Boston College coach Greg Brown after the game. They also intended and desired to meet with Gauthier, who was informed that the two Stanley Cup winners were in attendance by one of Brown’s assistant coaches.

Gauthier, though, declined to speak with them.

From Broad Street Hockey:

On the broadcast, NHL insider Pierre Lebrun mentioned how he reached out to Gauthier’s agent, Kurt Overhardt, and asked if he had an explanation as to why the player did not want to sign with the Flyers.

“It’s a private issue between the player and his family,” Overhardt told TSN’s Pierre Lebrun. “We definitely had conversations with Philadelphia, we had very respectable conversations with Philadelphia about it, we’ve chosen just to take the high road and leave all that information private.”

This last item is downright weird.  Did one of the Flyers give him a wedgie?  By the way, I think he means “respectful”.

I don’t regret that this head case won’t be joining the Flyers.  In fact, one has to contemplate the notion that the Flyers dodged a bullet.

8 minutes ago, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

Oh, a big part of Schmuck being here was Bobby Clarke. Clarke started grooming Schmuck back in Florida. I love Bobby Clarke the hockey player. Let me preface that. I love a player who is tenacious at both offense and defense. Clarke was the original two-way center. Clarke the executive is terrible and it brings the worst out in him. Bobby Clarke's fingerprints of ineptitude, inferiority and incompetence are all over the organization. 

Interesting and plausible notion.  Organizational dysfunction, passed down like substance abuse, and afflicting an NHL franchise: Clark, Holmgren, Scott, Chuck.  I like to think Timonen and Briere are inoculated.  Are they?

46 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

I have to admit, I didn't think it would be as bad as this has been.

I thought, the guy must have learned a few things from his first go around.

Something, something about failure being the best teacher....

 

Anyway I'm glad he's gone, to everyone else who **** their pants when he was hired, you were correct, not that you wanted to be, but good call on that terrible hire. 

 

@flyercanuck for sure.  Amusing to note he stopped watching for a couple of years.  There were others and it would be funny to see who was stoked and who was indignant.  
 

Worth adding, as others have intimated, that Chuck was just the most visible component of a completely dysfunctional organization.  It won’t change unless the Flyers completely clean house, including Scott, who seems to have already been kicked upstairs.  Actually, I blame Scott more than Fletcher.  Chuck being Chuck is his fault.

We all knew it would end this way when he was hired.

3 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

@terp

If "we're" doing it, it would definitely have to be in small manageable chunks.

And I had a similar thought, even starting to look at the task that narrowly- the results would most likely appear scattershot.

 

It would be an intimidating project to take on.

 

The discrepancies between services really shone brightly this year. 

Matthew Savioe was rated really high by some services and not in the top 15 in others.

One guy looked at his skating and wrote it's not explosive, yet every other report listed skating as strength. It's tough to know who to believe. The guy with the question had specific reasons for writing what he did and explained it.

Your example of Cutter Gauthier is another perplexing kid.

Is he top 5 or not even top 20?

Such a crap shoot.

This is what drew my attention: a guy who is somewhere between the 3rd and 20th best prospect begs for someone to look back and see who does and doesn’t know what he’s talking about.  I get that these are 18 year old guys and by nature it is hard to predict.  But, even so, 17 places?  It means there are some significant disagreements among these people, whoever they are.

2 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

 

In the age of I'm always right and everyone else is stupid this is a great question.

 

I think it would be difficult to find metrics that make the case "these guys know what they're looking at" ironclad.

 

It would need to be a very analytics heavy study for certain though.  I don't think I'd even want to read the report beyond the summary. 

 

 

You mean….I have to do it myself?  

It might not be that bad if it is done in baby steps.  Maybe look five years of first round picks for two sources, starting 10 years ago, NHL games played, GPG, PPG, something like that. After the first round, it’s like roulette anyway and would probably look that way statistically.

Hundreds of players have been ranked by each of these sources.  Has anyone ever attempted to objectively evaluate the evaluators?  Is there any reason why I would be more inclined to rely on the evaluation of one versus another?  No doubt, there could be a fair amount of “play” in any attempt to evaluate the evaluators.  But has anyone tried?

7 minutes ago, radoran said:

Right now

Yup, good point though even Dave Scott might struggle to walk back this vote of confidence in 120 days time.

Scott emphasized that he doesn’t think it will be a “three-five-year rebuild.” All he said it will take is “two or three” players to complement the strong core group he believes the Flyers have when they’re healthy. He and Fletcher both pointed to the bad luck the team has had with injuries.

[Translation: I (Dave Scott) am still deeply, deeply in denial, going so far as to say that, just like last year, and despite a 13 game losing streak, a last place record as well as a worse performance than last season, we’re still three players away from being a contender.].
 

Queue the “rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic” analogies/laugh track.

Likewise, Scott said he likes what he’s seen from Fletcher and showed no indication he has plans to rework the front office in the near future.

“Right now, Chuck’s my guy and we’re trying to build around that,” Scott said.

Let that sink in for a moment: 

Chuck’s….my…..guy…. 

He doesn’t even know to be embarrassed.

[Translation: Look, maybe I scared you with some of my earlier, laughable assertions.  But please allow me to reassure you by saying that I’m completely delusional, have no intention of admitting any mistakes, and need to allow Fletcher another season or three to completely gut this team before I wake up and acknowledge the stench.]
 

Follow on question for Dave Scott: Which of Fletcher’s moves do you actually like?  Other than a couple of draft picks, I can’t think of even one that has worked out well for the team, so let’s start with something, anything to back up your affirmation that he’s your “guy” and to validate your soundness of mind.

Skinny: It is difficult to imagine a more frightening and depressing outcome to this press conference. 

3 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

@terp

so you're saying, no play-off, then?

 

 

Seriously though, Scott's "bias for action" has not yielded success. 

Short of spinning the team off and selling them to a billionaire douche- I don't see a way this swamp gets drained.

I’ve seen nothing in quite some time to suggest this is by any means a “playoff team”.  If they make the playoffs, it’s a counterproductive miracle that distorts perceptions of what they really are.

i don’t foresee a sale by any means.  I’m inclined to think however that the shame of this is so intense that Comcast is forced to act drastically to right the ship.  No assurances given, more like, if I were Dave Scott, I would desperately want to rehabilitate my reputation.  

4 hours ago, LegionOfDoom said:

What if the D ended up being:.......

(most unlikely) 

Provorov - Hagg

Sanheim - Myers

Ghost - Gustafsson

Braun

 

 

or maybe...

 

Provorov - Ghost

Sanheim - Myers

Hagg- Gustafsson

Braun

 

This was an odd signing. An equal or less than/greater than Ghost.

 

But what if PP1 was:

(could be badass)

 

G/Coots/Jake

Ghost - Gustafsson

 

PP2:

JVR/Hayes/TK

Sanheim - Lindblom?/NAK?

 

 

Last year the questions where on offense(Hayes), since Fletch got us Nisky and Braun to settle our D pretty straight forward.

This year our D is the question with offense being second kindle.

It's like you had a set number of Lincoln Logs and your parents take away some and drop you a different set that you have to figure out how to use and incorporate the build to your existing imagination of how you wanted to build it.

 

I know the Power Play and secondary scoring was on his to do list.

He just went about and got odd pieces that say: Can also be used in Power Play situations as well piece.

It is odd, but Gus does fit a need in Power Play use but, not in better 1st pairing partner....

 

He might think Provy has matured enough to not need Nisky (training wheels) and might see Ghost or Hagg as a fill in and see how it goes. But the thing is he isn't that type of GM, when they put Farabee on hold to sign Grant and Thompson, it was because they had the experience and depth to hold those deep positions in the Heavy Playoff situations that he didn't feel comfortable for Farabee to have to carry or any other youngin.

 

What was his thought process for picking up Gustafsson? Improving the Power Play? Has somewhat veteran experience? I don't think they want to put Myers in that position or break up the 2nd pairing to allow them to grow together for now.

If this is our opening night defensive roster, I would try Provy with Ghost on the first pair and maybe shuffle it up during the 3rd period on a case by case situation.

I think Myers will get more PK time this coming season with a splash of Sanheim here and there.

Provy, Braun and Hagg will most likely do the heavy lifting.

From what I’ve read, the only way you want Gostisbehere and Gustaffson on the ice together is on the power play.  This could be exciting even, but at a cost of having a pretty unbalanced defensive line up.
 

I think there are some pairings to maximize the skill sets but it’s not ideal (e.g. two of the top 7 probably shouldn’t be in the line up together).  While I hope another move is coming, as I look around the league, I can’t imagine anything plausible that corrects this.  
 

My knee jerk move is to dump Ghost though I can’t say what that accomplishes without knowing who our new #7 would be.  If it’s Mark Friedman, it’s a salary dump only and maybe a hockey net negative as well.

While Fletcher has indicated he is bargain hunting, this move seems to have more to do with the expansion draft than I would have expected.  
 

Their defensive line up seems weird to me for now, as if there has to be another move coming.  With Gustaffson in the line up in place of Niskanen, Gostisbehere’s iffy defensive play makes him an odd fit for 7th defenseman.  So on the one hand I think it’s more likely he’s on the move but on the other am unclear why, if he is, it hasn’t happened before now.  

This is expensive, but I may feel differently if the picks are reclaimed in a subsequent Hägg or Ghost trade.

Maybe Tallon doesn't worry about this but he's not doing himself any favors by broadcasting to the entire league that the content of sensitive, confidential trade discussions with the Panthers may end up in in the newspaper.

I have to assume someone from the Flyers already called Tallon and tuned him up.

@ruxpin

I don't recall seeing them paired; referring to them as individuals, not as a pair. MacDonald is more able down low than Streit I'll give you that. I would say Carle is better than both, which gives you my frame of reference at least.

Terp here, alive and kickin'.

Took my 8 year old son to his first NHL game yesterday. I actually got a little misty when the Flyers took the ice.

Mason stole the game, no question. Not only was he very good, he made timely saves, none bigger than the one he made on the doorstep to keep it at 2-1. It's a different game if that goes in and I still don't know how he kept it out. His puck handling is great too obviously.

Raffl plays in all situations, an amazing thing for an undrafted guy who was playing in a tier 2 Swedish league last season.

MacDonald and Streit were frequently overpowered down low and I could see this being an issue playoff time. Both are terrific, creative even first passers which is defense in and of itself but you do not want them chasing forwards down low. They aren't good at it.

Scott Hartnell, Kimo Timonen and of course Claude Giroux played very well. Giroux earned each of his penalties as did Hartnell. Meanwhile, Sean Couturier may have been the best player on the ice other than Mason.

Downie is is probably concussed again. Berglund interfered with him and deliberately put his shoulder into his head and I don't think a suspension would be out of place other than the fact that it was Downie, so nothing will happen.

Cheers guys.

@RonJeremy

Point taken re all things equal, draft need. However, in this case, while these two are close now (at least to most of us) we don't know how close the Flyers thought they were at the time. Perhaps they thought Laughton was a no brainer given who was left on the board. Not all good decisions turn out optimally.

The game last night made 40 so regardless what that website says he can't be returned to the London Knights. But by FC's guideline he likes the site's 45 so I'll just roll with it. Barring injury that'll be two weeks. I can accept that. Lol

Um...unless Maata plays goal for the next 5 games, he has 25 to go. However, if he starts even one game in goal, I'll agree that he is no longer a prospect.

@Polaris922

Prospects play in the NHL. They often get sent down to whatever and they don't suddenly turn into prospects again when that happens. Similarly, a player doesn't stop being a prospect just because he plays with the big club for awhile. Maybe in your book Maata is no longer a prospect but an established NHL player but as I wrote earlier 40 pro games is too small a sample for nearly everyone.

@Mad Dog

I made a point of watching him play after posting a question about his development on another thread. And while I like what I see, please refer to flyercanuck's above post. Also please refer to the career of Ron Flockhart, who fizzled out after scoring a point a game as a rookie. It is too early to say Maata is anything more than a good prospect.

Thanks for agreeing with me.

I can't believe anyone is comparing a guy who remains a "prospect" at this point to a guy who's done as well as Maatta as a 19 year old NHL defenseman. Pure homerism this time fellas. It would be similar to me saying Harrington is better than Couturier.

I don't care if the guy scores 100 goals in the OHL and is named Prince of Wales... Until he plays and succeeds at the NHL level, he's still just a prospect, no matter how promising his future may look.

As I've said... Let's revisit this in a few years and see how the two compare. Give Laughton a chance to show whether it was a good move or not. As of right now, it was not. You guys could use Maatta on your defense right now.

Maata has played far less than a full season, so he's proven very little. Perhaps what he's proven is that Bylama is great at hiding his inexperience with good match ups or that it is easy to play third pair behind one of the best offenses in the NHL. Not saying he's no good, just that you should not be saying he has proven anything more than that he is a good prospect (which is all he is at this point, a prospect). This is only marginally more than Laughton has proven and could evaporate tomorrow night. His sample at this point doesn't constituent a coming out party.

Remember when he was drafted? Everyone said......who? And rightly so. Everyone about fell over dead when they'd didn't take Matta. To aziz's point...how the hell did they do that? Was it luck or is there someone in in the organization that can squint ahead and see this stuff? Pretty impressive if it isn't mostly luck.

Can anyone say how Matta is looking by comparison?

I've missed a lot of games lately so was excited to see the Flyers take on the Isles last night. Apologies to all the naysayers but Couturier played great. The sequence I liked best was when he bodied the defenseman and brought it out from behind the net for a scoring chance. He's one smart player. Look out naysayers because the offense is going to come.

@darthbal

While I agree that the Flyers have chemistry issues up front (though after tonight it looks like they are making some progress in this area) and FOR SURE have some personnel issues on the blue line, I'm pretty sure the Flyers' problem goes beyond personnel. My view is they no longer have an identity. While teams like Detroit and New Jersey have an organization wide commitment to a style of play and a focus on drafting or obtaining personnel to fit that style, the Flyers reinvent themselves every year, adding a grab bag of skill sets to the mix and hoping for the best. Lots of the players they bring in are fine players but it is hard to get the mix right when you change the mission every year. It seems pretty clear to me that Homer and Lavy were NOT on the same page. For example, I don't know how Lavy would ever want the defense that Homer gave him in order to play an attacking, up tempo style. It's ludicrous. I suspect it happens because the organization has no patience. Something like: Ed gets rambunctious, again, so they throw out the plan, go with the quick fix and, even worse, sign the player he's fixated on that off season in order to placate him.