radoran

I'm not buying into the "Canada deserves another team" argument at this point. I think Winnipeg put a cap on that "deserving." Seven of the top ten Canadian cities already have a team, with Winnipeg the only city under a million people (695K). Quebec has about 20K more. The Buffalo metro has about 1.1M people and there have long been questions about whether Buffalo "can support" a team. I can tell you first hand there are fewer hockeymad cities in the US like Buffalo (Rick notwithstanding) and the team is an integral part of what makes the city identify itself. If Buffalo "can't support" the Sabres, shouldn't we wait to see if the Jets actually succeed in Winnipeg before deciding more small Canadian cities "deserve" NHL teams? You can forget about Hamilton - Tronno will never allow it, much less Buffalo. After that, London has less than 500K people. That leaves Quebec. Does Quebec "deserve" a team simply because it had one and lost it? If Quebec puts together a convincing argument that it will have a new arena and signifcant fan and sponsor support for a team - long term - then I have absolutely no problem with the Quebec Coyotes. I'm just not down with the idea that they "deserve" it. Besides, Quebec is a very nice city. I'd hate to see those ruffian Canadian fans burn it down if their team loses.

I think Jagr has a feel for when a team has the "it" to do something special in a season. I think he feels that he has that here - that this was an opportunity to play for a real contender. Pittsburgh clearly was treating him as a swan song. He wanted to be an eagle. I don't think he ever felt that Washington had a serious chance when he was there and, I mean, seriously - the Rangers? Sheeeya. Philly has given him a late career charge and he's making the most of it. After watching former Flyers go out and get their names on the Cup, I won't mind if a couple former Penguins are on it again under the name PHILADELPHIA FLYERS. He's a real force with the puck. Eerily reminds me of Lindros at times - the 68 (instead of 88) doesn't help. Not the physical edge to the game, but the physical presence on the puck. His influence off the ice is enough that they should just give Shelley's "intangible" money to Jagr. The impact on Voracek could be - COULD BE - career changing. '68 and '93 playing for the Flyers. We've got to be among the most popular teams in Czech. Imagine if they had Vokoun instead of Bryzgalov...

I wouldn't mind a stricter crease rule and a restricted "no hit" area for goalies. That's just not the way the rules are now. The way the rules are now, Lucic deliberately charged Miller, caused a concussion and should have been suspended. As you note, you can see the moment he switches from "play the puck" to "seek and destroy" - it blows my mind that Brendan Shanahan came out and said he saw no clear intent to hit Miller. Lucic was maybe deciding on a pizza topping for after the game? Rewriting the opening paragraph of his thesis paper on the Asian Experience in the Reconstruction South? Musing on whether or not he put too much thyme into the stew last night? How is it that it is obvious to EVERYBODY BUT Brendan Shanahan what Lucic's "intent" was?

some additional points from here: http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/The-NHL-doesn-8217-t-need-to-further-coddle-ov;_ylt=AvgVimf058WXMWpPXyD06jN7vLYF?urn=nhl-wp17575 Again - not arguing whether the rules are "right" or "wrong," rather noting that they are, in fact, rules. Goalies are not currently "fair game," according to Rule 42.1 Charging: A goalkeeper is not "fair game" just because he is outside the goal crease area. The appropriate penalty should be assessed in every case where an opposing player makes unnecessary contact with a goalkeeper. However, incidental contact, at the discretion of the Referee, will be permitted when the goalkeeper is in the act of playing the puck outside his goal crease provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact. And according to 69.4 Interference On The Goaltender: If an attacking player initiates any contact with a goalkeeper, other than incidental contact, while the goalkeeper is outside his goal crease, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed. A goalkeeper is not "fair game" just because he is outside the goal crease. The appropriate penalty should be assessed in every case where an attacking player makes unnecessary contact with the goalkeeper. However, incidental contact will be permitted when the goalkeeper is in the act of playing the puck outside his goal crease provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such unnecessary contact. Does anybody see Lucic making "reasonable effort to avoid such contact"? How about ANY effort whatsoever? The primary argument here is that Lucic had "every right" to hit Miller. While the NHL argues that Lucic not only made reasonable efforts to avoid the contact, in fact he had no intent to hit Miller whatsoever. I find both positions bizarre to say the least. I am in full agreement with Wyshynski that they don't need more rules to protect goalies. They already have them. They just need to be enforced. And respected.

It's not impossible to fit him into the lineup, but the question is where: First Line: • LW Scott Hartnell(notes), C Claude Giroux, RW Jaromir Jagr(notes) Second Line: • LW James van Riemsdyk(notes), C Danny Briere(notes), RW Wayne Simmonds Third Line: • LW Matt Read, C Max Talbot, RW Jakub Voracek Fourth Line: • LW Harry Zolnierczyk(notes), C Sean Couturier(notes), RW Zac Rinaldo(notes) Clearly Nodl (while injured) is "out". I'd caution against having an entire fourth line of rookies, but we already have an entire fourth line of rookies. It's a good problem to have, but it is a problem...

NHL officiating is horrendous - oh, heck, major sports (and college sports and, well, sports in general) are, too. These guys are just people. They don't see everything. They don't call everything. They aren't perfect. My problem more often than not is with the second ref on the ice making the call from out of position when the other ref has the better line on the play. I think a possible solution in this instance is to allow reply for assigning penalties (at a break) when blood/obvious injury is involved. Just because a player "gets away with it" in the speed of the game shouldn't be an excuse to avoid the penalty. This stick to Talbot's mouth is a classic example. Then to give HIM a double minor is simply adding insult to injury. Obviously some logistics would be involved. Guys definitely need to keep better track of their sticks regardless.

I wouldn't trade Voracek straight up for Crater. OK, maybe in FHL... And why give Columbus Bob? As for the rumor of CLS seeking a goalie, that's why they dealt LeClaire and kept Mason - HE was "their goalie." (not that LeClaire was a BFD). The issue with this team is not the forwards - although there is a little inexperience there - the deal to make would solidify the D corps. Where do you put Crater in this lineup? Sure, the fourth line "worries" me a bit (aside from 18-going-on-30 Couturier) but would you slot a $5M Center into the Fourth line? First Line: • LW Scott Hartnell(notes), C Claude Giroux, RW Jaromir Jagr(notes) Second Line: • LW James van Riemsdyk(notes), C Danny Briere(notes), RW Wayne Simmonds Third Line: • LW Matt Read, C Max Talbot, RW Jakub Voracek Fourth Line: • LW Harry Zolnierczyk(notes), C Sean Couturier(notes), RW Zac Rinaldo(notes)

Kaberle was great in Tronno - where there's no pressure to succeed or actually win anything. Now he's just playing out the string and collecting a check.

His coaching style convinces guys to take lazy stick penalties? Lazy holding penalties? What's he giving them? Sleeping pills? There is no league-wide vendetta against the Flyers. Virtually ever referee has entered the league in the last 20 years, so why would they have any vendetta against the Flyers - I'll wager some of them don't even know who the Broad Street Bullies are. Devorski is the longest-tenured ref, and he's only been on since 1987. You know what people who watch their team play believe? That the refs are out to get them. In every city I have watched hockey, the vast majority of fans feel that there is some league-wide conspiracy against their team. No, really. Stop making lazy plays and you'll stop taking lazy penaties. It's really that simple.

I think quite often you see refs calling games "tight" at the start of the season and then the calls tend to ease off down the stretch. There are, of course, exceptions to every rule. But I think the refs feel they can teach guys to stop some of the more routine stuff and then they can really call the egregious things when it counts. That said, the Flyers have been taking far too many routine penalties and they need to adapt to how the game's being called.

I'd be quite happy with a rule restricting the goalie's movements - even beyond the "trapezoid" and crease. I can totally see where this is a "regular hockey play" - except that the goalie is involved. The question of "should Lucic be able to hit Miller" in that situation is academic. The refs are going to call a penalty if you make absolutely no effort to avoid contact. That's the rule. Is it how it "should" be? I'd say that the goalie should have extra protection, yes. For many reasons which have been amply cited in this thread. Again, goalies restricted to a certain area outside the crease? I could work with that. Hell, I think we'd have done better if some of our goalies were harnessed to the net. If Lucic runs Bryzgalov like that, gets a two minute, knocks Bryz out for several games (and counting) and gets no suspension I have a feeling many would be citing some sort of league vendetta against the Flyers. And if Shanahan doesn't think that Lucic "intended" to hit Miller - which is what the "he has every right to make that hit" argument implies and the League has explicitly states DID NOT happen - then what on God's green Earth was Lucic intending to do??

I can't see them retiring #88 - but I also don't see a large number of people clamouring to wear it. There are only two in the league right now. Hmmm... I wonder if the ping pong balls dropped differently, if Pat Kane would have worn 88 in Philly... Still, I think, like Pelle, it'll remain "unofficially" retired.

I think there's no question we got the better of the Crater deal. No question whatsoever. I don't know that I give up the #8 for Crater along, much less the #8 AND Voracek (#7 overall). This is clearly the right place and the right time for Voracek, with Jagr coming back. I'd like to hope this guy blossoms. IMO Columbus needs someone who knows more about hockey running their hockey operations.

Aside from Ashbee, I don't think the Flyers have retired any number of a player who is not in the Hockey Hall of Fame. And Ashbee's clearly a special case. There are 11 people related to the Flyers in the Hall - and you wouldn't really count Allan Stanley, Darryl Sittler, Paul Coffey or Dale Hawerchuk as "Flyers" first. That leaves Clarke, Barber and Parent (along with Snider, Keith Allen, Gene Hart) and now Mark Howe. Howe is the first Flyer player to have his number retired who didn't win a Cup, though. I have a feeling we'll see a few more in the next few decades... I think Hextall is a prime candidate and, of course, I'd advocate for JLC :-)

I scrolled up and rewatched several times before posting. Lucic clearly is pursuing the puck as he crosses the blue line. As he nears Miller (before the top of the circle, with Miller approaching the dot) he moves his stick to the left - away from the puck - and clearly slams directly into Miller. He even stops moving his skates. He is not pursuing the puck at that point - he's lining Miller up from the top of the circle to the dot. It's a legit hockey play on *any player but the goalie* because Lucic knows damn well that he's not going to take a hit from Miller. He knows that Miller's not going to attempt to do anything like stickhandle - he's simply going to clear the puck aside. Lucic doesn't even follow the puck AFTER MILLER HITS IT - he's STILL looking at Miller on the ice with the puck near the boards BEHIND HIM. If Lucic comes in with his stick on the ice hoping for a Miller whiff on the puck, that's one thing. He's not. He'd clearly given up on puck pursuit and clearly, IMO, intended to hit Miller..

It's a fast game. That's the whole point. But, everyone knows how fast it is - including the players. Lucic knew he wasn't going to get to the puck and he took the opportunity to take a shot at Miller. If it had been a defenseman? An interesting question. I don't think that any part of the play happens the same way. A defenseman would be expected to be able to either play or possess and move the puck or deliver a hit right back and Lucic would have to play that - or at least acknowledge that - when it's quite clear that a goalie (Miller) won't be doing anything but clearing the puck. Look at Lucic's stick - is this a guy who is playing for the puck if Miller whiffs on the pass? No. Lucic has lined Miller up "long before" (in split second terms) he gets there. Shanahan may have said that Lucic didn't "intend" to hit Miller - but if he didn't, I'm not sure what else he was "intending" to do.

He could have made a move to avoid the contact with the goalie. He could have made an attempt to play the puck. He did neither of these things, paying no attention to the puck whatsoever, and slammed into Miller head-on, bringing his arms up as the impact occurred. If the *didn't* "intend" to hit Miller, just what the hell was he "intending" to do there?

I think that that confidence gives the team more confidence. They don't see a guy frequently out of position trying to leap across an open net trying to make a mid-air stick save. Ah, memories... I like Bryz's size as well. It doesn't seem to me that he feels the need to drop into a butterfly at the drop of a hat and takes up some nice area when he does. The odd goal flinging off the tip of a defenseman's stick or backside is one thing. But that's been happening an awful lot. Just spitballing here, but could the D be trying to do "too much" - are they conditioned by the less-than-marquee goaltending we've had around here to try to do too much, possibly creating the defelction that gets by the goalie who's in position to make the original stop? That happens "all the time" as well - it's just happened an awful lot in these first dozen games. The only terribly *bizarre* thing to me about the whole Bryz thing is that they're putting what's likely to be Ed Snider's final Cup shot (nine-year contract) on, of all things, a Russian goalie. Two of them, no less. Well, you knew they weren't going Czech again...

The only thing making a goalie "fair game" in this situation will do is improve Michael Leighton's job prospects. A player is "fair game" when he has control of the puck and is skating with it - not the case here. You can't just willy-nilly barrel into players. Doubly so for goalies - and that's the way the game is called, not the way I made it. "Should" it be different? Makes no difference. It's not different. Lucic made no attempt to play the puck OR avoid the hit. It was intentional and a penalty - regardless of who got hit or where the hit occurred.

It was a cheap hit from a cheap player. This is exactly the unnecessary contact that the league has been trying to get out of the game - for the health of the players involved. If Miller is carrying the puck, he's fair game. If he's playing it to the corner - he's not. As much as I agree with the "stay in the crease" argument, this is not a situation in which that applies. This is a charging call on anybody. Lucic doesn't try to play the puck at all and deliberately goes for the hit high on Miller. To me, that's "intent to injure". What other intent could it be?

I may, in fact, be having a little Winter Classic soiree at my house in South Philly. Depends on a few things being repaired/finished. Will keep y'all apprised...

Well, the thing with Bryz is - he ain't going no where. I like Bryz. I'm still not sure about the deal. It's not Shellyrific, but it's not Vokoun at $1.25M, either. I don't think we can properly evaluate the signing of a nine-year deal in 12 starts and 13 appearances with a totally-revamped forward corps and a defense that's been, shall we say, a bit shaky at times? Not to mention missing Pronger for a few games. I like the calmness of Bryzgalov in net. He doesn't have the flailing, flippy-floppy, skates-on-fire approach that we're used to around here. I think it helps the team and I know it makes me feel better. Does he give up some bad goals? Does he have bad games? Everybody does. Everybody. You just hope more of them are in September/October/November than March/April/May.

Miller needs to get his head in order and taking a few starts off might be good for him. Those two back-to-back glove side goals to Hartnell and JVR were an indication that there's something really wrong. Enroth looked solid and played well for them last season. He's not going to replace Miller by any stretch, though.

I warned my Buffalo friends about Leino, too. Crater is not, nor has he ever been that I've seen, a "playmaker."

Leino isn't injured - but he's in Ruff's doghouse all right. Dropped him off the first line, then the second line. I think he was skating 4 for a few games. Leino, IMO, needs stability in linemates and sustained playing time. He's not going to get it in Buffalo.