elmatus

I hope Sanheim's been working on his defensive game... a lot.

As far as the second line goes, I actually think they've been playing quite well. Not much to complain about there so far. And really, Farabee and Atkinson should be at the level they are. The bright spot is more so Brassard. Hard to say if he can remain impactful as he has been in such a short timeframe, but it's been nice to see at least.

I mean. I get the dislike based on his questionable body of work, but he hasn't played a game yet here. Probably best to save some vitriol for the aftermath.

9 minutes ago, CoachX said:

See, this confuses me. Hart has one bad game and he is criticized,  nit picked and the panic button is pushed. He has a great game, and its too early to make "any assessment"

 

Sure, except he didn't have just one bad game. He had a very bad season last season. 

That's not me saying we need to hit the panic button either, but we're not going anywhere if he doesn't play significantly better than he did last season. Is that all his fault? Probably not, but many of his gaffes last season were really on him. He needs to be better, or this team isn't doing much of anything.

Again, I'm not saying he can't be measurably better. He's very young, and has also had some very strong runs already. I'm simply saying that he *needs* to be better than last season for this to amount to anything more than another season of missed playoffs.

Solid game all around. Many of those new guys looked good, which is nice to see. Hart was decent too. He had a handful of good tests and did well. 

This Seeler kid should just sit down. I'm not a Risto fan by any measure, but I have to think Rasmus means Seeler doesn't see ice time. I mean, Braun is no better, but I don't want two of them on the ice personally. 

Ellis, Cam, and Brassard all made for a nice watch. The expected trio showed up very nicely too, but I want more consistency out of them before I say much. TK seemed to remember how to play hockey again, which is definitely nice. Hopefully he can continue.

I'm cautiously optimistic about getting Hayes back. Despite not being much of a producer, he does bring a lot of the other intangibles. I'm curious if Brassard takes his spot as 2C though. He'd have to keep up his play from last night, but honestly Brassard showed more offensive flair in two games than Hayes did all last season. Offense isn't everything, but it's a nice combo with the more defensively sound Hayes also able to move to the third if we need it and make a bit of a checking line with upside. Honestly that might be what he's best suited to anyway. Brassard was definitely the nicest and most surprising to me in the past games. I honestly didn't expect he'd have the impact he seems to be having.

Hart is obviously the biggest question mark, and it's way too early to make any assessment there. The other big one for me is definitely Risto. I'm not a fan of his body of work at all. I'm hoping somehow it was all a question of poor coaching and AV can make him into a new man. If not, this team better practice their PK a lot more during practices.

Still, I'll take this one. Sure, the Kraken really don't look like much of an NHL team, but kudos to the O&B for playing well against them anyway. It's hardly uncommon for them to play down to weaker competition. It's nice to see them not fall into that trap for at least this game. 

On 7/30/2021 at 3:37 PM, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

What aggravates me with Giroux is that he doesn't hold people accountable. When Primeau was captain, he never had trouble holding players accountable and they ALL knew what was expected of them. I don't see that with Giroux. I see a captain who has difficulty relaying the coach's message and in turn, difficulty relating the player's concern to the coach. 

I’m not saying this is wrong, but I am curious as to how this would be known. I’ve never heard any players say this about Giroux. I’ve never heard coaches or anyone else who might be involved at the locker room level talk about Giroux in this way. 

Again, it’s very possible he doesn’t try to hold anyone accountable, and maybe he does have challenges relaying messages and what not. I’m just wary of saying this when i frankly don’t know. It’s also very possible that he has tried to hold players accountable to whatever extent possible, but that there’s no amount of holding to account that’s good enough to make the players and the team into something they’re not. 

For all i know, Giroux tears players a new one after every back to back loss. I have to say i doubt he just sits there and doesn’t get angry or passionate or try to fire the team up. That seems more unlikely to me. 

I really think a lot of this kind of granular analysis is frankly unnecessary. I’ve said this many times before, but... We can sit in our chairs far away from the rink and talk about character and find whatever other nebulous excuses we want, but all of that is ignoring a far more likely truth — the team as assembled just isn’t good enough to be a contender. The constituent parts involved don’t amount to a team that can win in the playoffs. That really is the no.1 most logical and rational conclusion to draw after ten years of a rebuild that hasn’t worked. 

The coaching has changed. The GM has changed. A good number of other folks in the org have changed too. But none of that matters if you’re building your house out of sticks. And that’s not just Giroux either. In fact, it’s not even mostly Giroux. He’s been one of the only semi bright spots of an otherwise forgettable decade for this team. 

32 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

So as a GM if we have this conversation and you (pretending you are either one of them) then I have to look at the possibilities of moving you two before I am left with nothing but fond memories of days gone.

 

Because we'll the best interests of the club comes first and we'll assets coming back goes a long was in helping to rebuild the team and prepare for the future.

 

It's a hard risky decision to have to make but one that needs to still be made.

 

I just wouldn't be very wise to be left with nothing to show for it in my mind.

I still contend Giroux should have been traded this off-season, while he still had reasonable value to a contending team. Fletch went pretty hard in the other direction though. Which, fair enough I suppose, he's an NHL GM and I am not.

Couts is less straightforward imo. While you are right in that we could use the assets to kickstart a desperately needed rebuild, I'd probably be more inclined to give him that contract and let him play the next 7ish years in PHI as the next captain.

Obviously, if Couts talks about not wanting to sign at all because he wants to try and play for a contender, then yeah, he should be moved before it's too late. I have to assume Fletch has started this convo with him by now.

On 8/3/2021 at 9:29 AM, OccamsRazor said:

Oh and just to change the subject a little.

 

Have ever seen this brought up but WTF is Chuckles going to do if Coots comes to him and tells him he wants to test the market ala Phillip Danault?

 

Would they decide to go ahead and trade him before the trade deadline for the best return?

 

Or depending on the team record just wait it out?

 

Honestly, I wouldn’t be shocked to see both Couts and Giroux test the market when their contracts go up. They’d both have a similar reason for doing so, despite being in different stages in their careers. 

Couts’ next contract will be the ‘lock him in for long term and good money’ variety. As a perennial selke candidate with above average production, he’s quite possibly the most sought after type of player outside of generational talents. Unless he somehow nosedives in play between now and then, any number of teams would be wanting his services at that point. 

For Giroux, we have a guy who is aging but is still highly productive. He would be a top six winger with upside who is great pinching in for faceoffs and would be a formidable add on mostly any contending teams where he doesn’t have to be the best player on the roster.

So essentially both should be wanted. Opportunity will be there for them. What about motivation?

Well, unless something remarable happens between now and then, this current team doesn’t seem poised to really contend for a cup anytime soon. If they feel the same way, they may want to test the market to see if they can sign with a proper contender — Couts as a key member of a cup run, Giroux as a significant production add to an already good squad. 

So at that point, part of it really depends on how badly they want a cup. If winning a cup is hugely important to either or both of them, they’d have good reason to look elsewhere.

I’m not saying that will happen necessarily, only that i wouldn’t be shocked if it did. 

Honestly, I think Fletch has done what he could with the cards he was dealt. I find it refreshing that he did something at least. During the Hextall era, all we ever got were crickets regardless of how bubbly the team was year in and out. The moves he made really feel like a sh!t or get off the pot situation. Whether he was told he needs to get results this year or he's gone, I don't know, but it feels like he's making moves with a strong sense of urgency.

Is it enough to make this team a contender? I have to say I doubt it. The defense should be better certainly, and that'll help the goalies too, but we still lack true top end talent on this team, and it's very hard to win nowadays without that. I'm expecting this team to be a bubble team again. They may make the playoffs, but I'm not convinced they can do much more than win a round, and that's really dependent on the opponent even then.

I'm not blaming Fletch though. He's trying. I'm sure he would have preferred getting a Hamilton over a Risto, but that wasn't going to happen. I'm sure he would have rather gotten a younger defensive stalwart than Yandle, but it probably wasn't an option. I'm sure he would have loved nabbing an Eichel or something, but that was clearly also a pipe dream. Still, he did try to make some moves. I respect him for not just accepting the status quo and actually trying to do something.

I do hope I'm wrong, but I'm guessing they'll end up in the middle of the pack somewhere, maybe get a good run in the second half of the season, but then peter out once they reach playoff hockey. Put another way, I expect more of the same as we've had the last decade, as I really don't think the moves made are fundamental and impactful enough to change the team's fate.

41 minutes ago, CoachX said:

I think a player should play to his highest level of capability, at all times.

I agree with this 100%. My question is: who are we to say that he hasn't been doing this essentially the whole time? What if what we've gotten from him *is* his highest level of capability?

Now, granted, things happen in life and people are human. There are always things that will happen over the course of a lengthy NHL career that make for dips in production and results. That has happened for Giroux, just as it happened for every other NHL player in history.

But overall, Giroux has been remarkably consistent at doing what he's always done well. He's always been a playmaker, able to find teammates and put up pts (mostly assists), and he's essentially always done that. Some years he was a bit above average in that dept compared to others in the league; other years he was leaps above the vast majority. He was never bad in terms of using his ability and skill to do what he does best.

He had seasons over 90pts. There are two ways to look at that. We can say "yep, that's what i expect from Giroux, and he better do something like that every year now". Or we can say "well that's clearly not going to happen every time, and i'm super happy we got a player who could achieve that feat at all, cause very few ever do".

The first statement is largely divorced from reality imo. The second one is far more accurate.

From where I'm standing, two things have prevented Giroux from somehow going from overachiever to cup-winning, team-leading overachiever":

1) he was probably *never* good enough to be that kind of franchise pillar, at least not by himself. The fact the brass and fanbase came to see him in that light is understandable given his production, but production isn't everything.

2) he also *never* had any other truly elite players around him to help him out.

When Giroux was in his prime, the only other guy on the roster who had moments where he could keep up was Jakub Voracek. Now, I don't know about you, but Voracek is definitely not the kind of player I consider to be elite in the NHL. When Voracek is the second best player on your club, you better hope the no.1 guy is generational-level good, cause you're probably going to need it.

That's not on Giroux. The team never managed to draft and develop players who could truly help make this into a contender. 

Giving him some proper comparables here: He was drafted expected to be TJ Oshie, and instead lifted to play like he was Nicklas Backstrom and at times even Patrick Kane. 

And yet, where is Backstrom without Ovechkin? Kane without Toews?

Could he have been better still? Sure. Give him one of those other guys, and let's see what happens. But instead of judging him on what he hasn't done, and quite likely simply cannot do, we should really judge him on what he has and can. He has been the most productive Flyer in two decades, and he has been absolutely consistent in that. The fact he was gifted a bunch of other expectations at an early point in his career is really not his fault. The fact he was never given the same tools as others who were given similar expectations is likewise not his fault.

1 hour ago, ruxpin said:

 

Good post.

 

Yeah, I can't claim to be a Yandle fan, but there's really not anything to dislike about the signing.   I mean, the minute York is ready I kind of want him in there, so that's my only slight concern.   But if it doesn't have to be Yandle vs. York, then that isn't even a concern.   

 

Now, I wish we could change all of them to Lindstrom and Bourque for when Jones is in the net, but that's another topic altogether.

If York somehow made his way into the lineup, it would probably be to take minutes from Braun or Morin over Yandle. I’m not convinced York will play much in the NHL this season though. 

1 hour ago, mojo1917 said:

This isn't accurate.

Clinical Depression is absolutely an illness.

Depression (major depressive disorder) - Symptoms and causes - Mayo Clinic

Everyone experiences sadness and sorrow people who don't suffer from depression bounce back from sadness and sorrow.

 

 

 

Hold up now, my statement was not that depression is not an illness, it was that it’s very different from something like schizophrenia. I note this because it isn’t something very many people understand. Many people conflate all things psychological in one big umbrella.

major differences relevant to this discussion are that: a) we are all susceptible to developing mood disorders like anxiety and depression — the model often used to understand this is one of stress tolerance, which is something we all have. And b) mood disorders are far more common than other psychological disorders and illnesses. My statement included the provision that many athletes struggle with performance anxiety especially, which is very true. So true in fact that it’s virtually a certainty there are others on the team who do also.

i mention the first point because people too often see something like depression and think someone is now damaged goods. Mood disorders are both much more common than many realise and very manageable with the right support, which is why i mentioned the stuff about having MH professionals readily available. 

If Hart received a formal diagnosis, it’s also likely he now has medication, which is a good first step. He likely will also be seeing someone for CBT, which is the usual method for that diagnosis (at least here in Canada... i don’t imagine it’s different in the US)

Anyone comparing Yandle to Ghost has to be drunk. One has a fantastic career stat sheet and was for a long time considered among the top ten dmen in the league, the other had a couple reasonable seasons and was borderline ineffective at his role the rest of the time. Yandle is older of course, and we shouldn't expect a peak version of him, but even a lesser version of Yandle should absolutely be better than what we got out of Ghost for about 80% of his time in PHI.

I like the Yandle signing. There's really no downside to it. The way things stand, he's virtually guaranteed to be a better blueliner even at his age than Risto, Braun, or Morin, and he may even be better than Sanheim in most situations. All for a low price and no real commitment. What's not to like about that?

He also brings in more experience and the possibility of playing a mentor role, which I do think is more important than we might understand it to be a lot of the time.

5 minutes ago, Digityman said:

I'm with you on this.  I really wanted Halak.  I assuming Bernier at 2y, 8.25m was too rich for Chuck.   Hart absolutely sucked last year but if you take a wide view at it, it should just be just a blip in what should be a long successful career.   Kinda like Carey Price's blips.    If it carries over to this year and he sucks again, they have a real problem with Jones/Hart as a tandem.  I'm hoping Chuck just grabbed Jones because there wasn't much left and then he's trying to work a trade with JVR as the bait.  

Yeah, and I'm certainly not saying Hart is a lost cause or anything, only that he had an atrocious season. That happens to all goalies, even the good ones. Hopefully last season was just a blip for him, and he'll find a way to right the ship. He should have every opportunity to do so, as Ellis and Yandle are both experienced and reliable rearguards. And if Provo can step up with Ellis the way he was able to with Niskanen, his presence should be much improved also. 

I still think Risto is awful until proven otherwise, mostly because he has always been awful, and I'm not a big fan of hoping for lottery ticket winnings. But even if Risto is awful, the rest of the personnel changes on the back end should be able to make up for it. The addition of Yandle in particular means Risto can play third pairing minutes, and it should be fine. In fact, I'd bet good money Yandle was signed precisely for this reason. He's intended as insurance if and when Risto becomes Risto.

It'll definitely be an interesting season to see what shakes out. Personally, I don't feel at all confident about making predictions right now. There have been just too many personnel changes. It's worth noting that we lost two players I feel we really had to lose in Ghost and Voracek, so that's a plus. Fletch paid what he had to for the first, and he got an alright and different player back with Atkinson. Hard to say how those things work out in the end, but I don't hate it.

Ellis should be good and is probably the safest of the moves overall. Yandle may be a bit vanilla in his old age, but he was cheap and is likely still better than half our current defense. He brings in big experience numbers and can help mentor some kids along with Ellis, so that's fine too.

Jones is... well, i guess i don't know. Given what happened last season, I would have pushed for Fletch to get a much more established goalie, even if it meant cutting significantly into Hart's playing time. Hart was absolutely atrocious last year -- at a level that goes beyond having an iffy defense core in front of him. He was terrible at doing his job. It would have been nice to nab someone who could take the reins if needed, and I don't know if Jones is that guy. Jones is the guy you sign to hold you over while Hart does the heavy lifting. Hard to say if that works out. Hart needs to make up a lot of ground from last season. I'm not saying he can't, only that he must. Regardless of any improvements elsewhere, we're not making the playoffs if he plays like he did last season (unless Jones is able to take the starter role anyway).

And finally, I do not like Risto -- at all. Of all the moves, he's the only move I really don't like. I don't imagine I have to explain why. Others have done so already, as has virtually every sports writer and analyst in the world. And no, I don't think his awful play over the entirety of his career is just because he played for Buffalo. It's far more likely he was part of the problem in Buffalo, not some guy who was being held back.

Of course, AV doesn't have to play him much, which is what I predict will end up happening honestly. I bet Risto will get some chances and looks for the first 1/4 of the season or so, then AV will drop him down to third pairing minutes. He may play on the PP, but otherwise I expect he'll have Hagg-type minutes once AV gets fed up with his awful decision making, ungodly defensive gaffes, and terrible tendency to spend half his time in the box.

So even if Risto turns out to be a bust in these terms, the rest of the team has changed so significantly, I still have no idea what the end result will be. It's an interesting off-season at the very least, which isn't something we've been able to say for quite a while now.

The question of whether Fletch overpaid for these guys is another matter entirely. I think it's safe to say he almost certainly did overpay for Risto. The rest, meh. More to the point though, this is absolutely Fletch's team now. There are no more excuses for him to say he carried over a bunch of stuff. He's moved a major part of the core in Voracek, completely retooled the defense, and opted to take a lesser goalie when other more established ones were available. Whatever happens this season is now on his shoulders more than anyone else (including AV) -- and I for one will be placing whatever successes or failures we see this season in large part on him.

7 minutes ago, flyercanuck said:

Our management totally blows.

I mean maybe, but i wouldn’t use this as an example for that. What did you think they could get for a guy who had a couple good seasons way back and then a bunch of bad to awful after that. Truth is, Ghost had less than no value, he had minus value. We needed cap space, and we got it.

I’m not sold on Fletch any more than you are, but this isn’t mismanagement imo. This is pretty much what we should have expected. It was this or a buyout, and Fletch decided we needed cap space more than a 2nd round pick. That may prove to be wrong in the long run, but It’s not egregious from where we’re sitting right now. 

kind of sucks losing a second, but that’s the price for offloading bad contracts. He clearly didn’t have much for trade value, or he would have been traded some time ago. Seems fine to me. 

Now, if Fletch can’t get decent return for Voracek, that’s a different story....

Losing Twarynski certainly isn't anything major. Honestly many of the Seattle picks are head scratchers anyway. My guess is they opted to save a bunch of cap space to try and land some high priced FAs or something. Otherwise, on paper they look pretty mediocre at best with what they fished out of this expac draft.

As far as the Flyers go, I still feel like Voracek especially should be tradeable. It might require some retained salary, but he's been a productive player for his entire career. Aggravating defensively and prone to carry gaffes, but nonetheless productive. He's still a solid mid-six player who can pinch up on many teams in this league, which to me should mean he'd be tradeable. 

If that does happen, I actually think we come out ahead here. As @radoran or @ruxpin (whichever :D) mentioned already, we have a bunch of Twarynski's in the system. What we really need are players *better* than Twarynski. 

Bottom line for me, we lost very little and kept some guys who should absolutely be tradeable and traded away. Voracek is the top of the list, as I expect he's probably the most tradeable. JVR might be too, as long as Fletch hops on the wire pronto. Last season seems an awful lot like an outlier for him, and we should not expect a repeat of it. "His value will never be higher" absolutely applies to JVR right now imo.

Ghost seems a hard sell to me, but who knows. Some GMs have an awful habit of gambling on players who had one or two good seasons somewhere in their careers, which is pretty much exactly what Ghost is. A Chiarelli type might bite, if Fletch can find one of those.

3 hours ago, SCFlyguy said:

This is your reminder that we still have 5 more years of Hayes at $7M+ per year.

 

Will he break 50 pts this year?  There's always a chance.

I'm really hoping Fletch moves him in the off season. Not sure how possible or what would need to be done, but I really hope so. I have zero interest in another MacDud contract.

I really like Jones, but there are some amount of unknowns here i’m not super comfortable with. 
 

for one, the Flyers are really in not much better a position than the Jackets. Why does he want out? Does he want to play for a contender, or at least a team on the rise? If so, the Flyers really don’t fit the bill right now. 
 

Also, the price you noted definitely seems high to me. Sanheim whatever, but TK regressed massively this season, and I for one would like to see if he can figure things out again. I’m also not keen on getting rid of any 1st round picks. We need them, and there’s a decent chance any 1st we give up for the next couple years will be quite high. 

3 hours ago, CoachX said:

I just don't see a guy demonstrating an effort worthy of being the main piece.

Yeah, I mean we’re saying about 90% of the same thing. The only difference i can see is that you feel it’s more a question of lack of effort or desire, whereas I believe it’s more a lack of ability.
 

I think Giroux has always tried to do the best he could. I just don’t think his best is good enough to anchor a team. I don’t think he lacks a desire to win at all. i think he desperately wants to win, and my guess is that desire only increases every season where he doesn’t, as i expect it must for virtually all NHL captains in a situation like his. 

At the end of the day though, I feel like we’re landing in the same place in terms of whether or not this team can win it all. Unless i’m wrong in saying this. It looks like we’re both saying they just can’t win as assembled. 
 

that said, I honestly do hope you’re right and not me. It’s certainly much easier to find players who really want to win than players with top end skill. Maybe Fletch can find a few of those guys in the off season, and this team can find a way. 

3 hours ago, CoachX said:

So those coaches who have been able to win wherever they go, did they all learn to adjust?

 

Well, I don't know to be honest. I've been pretty clear in my belief that this core of players just doesn't have enough talent and skill to anchor a team into contention. That to me is still the single most important flaw in this team. At the end of the day, a coach can only play with the cards he's dealt, and I'm of the mind Vigneault has been dealt a mediocre hand at best.

Now, some coaches may be able to find a way to find with a mediocre hand, but I don't think very many can. It looks like AV maybe isn't in that very small group. Maybe had he been here instead of Hakstol when Giroux was in his prime, things might have been different. Personally I don't think so though, mostly because I don't think Giroux is good enough to carry a team alone. I think he would have needed a proper sniper to really shine, which he never had.

On the subject of the article you posted, I've never been shy of saying that Giroux is a great player. He's definitely and easily one of the best players this franchise has ever drafted and developed. That said, he was asked to do more than he was truly capable of doing, and he never had the support he would have needed to make this team into a contender.

I still think he should be traded though, because atm this team needs a rebuild far more than it needs a declining playmaker.

To your point though, is AV just not good enough to win anymore? I'm sure he can still win, I just don't think he can win with this roster is all, because I don't think this roster is good enough. AV isn't going to start potting in hat tricks and making a bunch of saves in net, so here we are.

14 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

Does this mean more that the NHL has adjusted to AV's system and he had no counter??

 

I do think you bring up an interesting point here. Any coach who follows a strict system, or who more or less tends towards similar things, will eventually run into other coaches who have studied him enough to have a good sense of what works against that system.

At that point, two options become available: one, the coaching staff finds a way to adjust and find success in other ways; two, elite players find a way to make those adjustments on the fly and score anyway.

In my view, the second option there is definitely the preferable one (assuming you don't have both). It would mean that no matter the coach, the team will be able to adjust. It would also allow for tweaks to gameplay on the ice as opposed to having to go from vision to planning to teaching to implementation. The road is shorter, meaning the outcome will almost certainly be more efficient.

The NHL has players who can do this very well of course (Crybaby). It's worth noting there are also a number of players who are very productive, but who seem to lack the ability to make these kinds of adjustments (Ovechkin). I'd be curious to follow the remaining slate of playoff contenders to see where they fit in this picture. I bet that kind of lens would actually make quite a bit of sense in a number of cases.

3 hours ago, FD19372 said:

I don't. We should sell high on Patrick. This might be the opportunity.

The sell high ship left port some time ago and seems to have been lost at sea. It would take a special brand of clueless for any GM to trade much for him right now. 

He's coming off a season where he scored a whopping 9pts in 52 games. In his first two, he scored at a 0.4p/pg clip. That ranks him below Hayes on the team's depth chart at center in terms of production.

In fact, he's about tied with Laughton, if we're still considering Laughton a center.

I'm not saying he shouldn't be moved necessarily, only that the return may not be anything very exciting. We'd definitely not be selling high.