fanaticV3.0

So Avery is pissed they tried to paint him as the "bad boy" of the show? Isn't his reputation as having been the "bad boy" of the NHL the entire reason he was on the show to begin with?

He's a very strange individual imo. His behavior as a player is well-known - to hockey fans - but he's offended they are portraying him as a bad boy? The whole fashion thing weirds me out too. Not so much that he's into looking nice (I don't care about that), but he acts all high-brow about it.

Out of curiosity, does anybody know if Avery was onto something, regarding the tone of the highlight package the producers put together? I've not ever watched more than five minutes of DWTS, but for all I know he has  a fair point. Or not; I don't know. One thing that I am pretty sure, and which he said: make an enemy of the producers, and your days are numbered on any show.

 

And that sounds EXACTLY like the Sean Avery we all know.

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone here who has.

Never watched that show, but if you have Avery on it, you really must be scraping the bottom of the barrel.

I don't watch it either, but saw it on one of the morning shows the other day. He's such a bitch.

Sean Avery always finds something to cry about.

http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/eye-on-hockey/24500056/sean-avery-blames-producer-for-early-dancing-with-the-stars-exit

@fanaticV3.0

 

I watched McGinn a little last night, he's  slower than Couturier.... a lot slower. 

 

That said he had some shifts where he looked pretty effective especially early in the 2nd, ,and some shifts where he was on the wrong side of the puck and had trouble recovering.

But for what that's worth the whole team had trouble last night, the Kings are big , physical and skilled and look to be peaking at the right time, they clutch and hold and don't give you any space and our top line struggles with that occasionally.

 

back to your friend Tye

 

He doesn't have the speed of Rinaldo

He doesn't have the "skill" of Downie and that's up for debate i guess because Downie can play stupidly (or better irresponsibly)  but he does have pretty good hands and is + with the puck on his stick.

Tye  can throw punches okay, but that's not really his game either.  

He's not as versatile as Raffl

 

I don't know where in the top 9 he fits if at all and as for the fourth line,  i think the thought is put some guys with some speed on that line to create some energy, at least Hall and Rinaldo have some wheels. The guy is a Tim Tookey style "tweener"  almost too good for the A but he will need the right situation to play regularly in the NHL, because he's certainly not the second coming of Tim Kerr or John LeClair.

 

I really , truly don't see him as being a guy the front office is "missing" on like Justin Williams or Patrick Sharp. 

Piss on Rinaldo's speed and Downie's "skill". Neither one of those things makes any impact on the team whatsoever. Downie isn't even going to be here next year, and rightly so, so who cares about him and his 3 goals and moronic play? Rinaldo could be the fastest player in the league and it still doesn't mean anything if you don't have any skill. Speed without skill (and I mean any kind, not just scoring touch) is meaningless. You don't know how he makes this roster, but go to bat for these two? Please.

Who's comparing him to Raffl? I compared him to two morons and a goon (Rosehill).

To redeem himself in the eyes of those who make personnel decisions. 

I know. My point was that he really hasn't done anything so bad that he needs to be redeemed from.He's never going to get a fair chance with this team imo. For some reason, they judge him more harshly than others. This is a team that plays Rinaldo, Rosehill, and Downie regularly regardless of their mistakes or lack of contributions.

@flyercanuck  I don't trust them to keep up this torrid pace, but so many victories over a lot of talented squads is more than promising. The Jeckel and Hyde portion of our personality will rear it's ugly head, but right now, like how we are sitting.

I don't think they have one to be honest. The Richards and Carter led teams were Jekyll and Hyde teams. This is a team that is growing/evolving before our eyes. Like Bre said, they've over .600 since the really bad start.

@brelic

 

I wonder why they recalled McGinn instead of Vandevelde. McGinn has more goals scored but is a -20. Vandevelde is a +1. I am not a McGinn hater but shouldn't you bring up a guy who is defensively responsible to fill a 3rd or 4th line spot?

Who cares? Rinaldo and Hall are a -13 and -14 respectively and they aren't going anywhere.

 

Philadelphia Flyers @NHLFlyers

ROSTER UPDATE: Steve Downie is day-to-day w/ upper-body injury & Tye McGinn will be recalled from @phantomshockey. http://flyers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=710725

 

Downie's out, so McGinn is getting a shot. I would guess he goes to the 4th line and Raffl moves up with Read and Coots. This is a good opportunity for McGinn to redeem himself. We're fighting for a playoff spot, so he'd better come in here hungry and ready to compete.

 

From what? Being d!cked around with and 3rd on his team (Phantoms) in scoring? Any perceived problem they have with him is an overreaction on their part. That's not to say the kid doesn't have any flaws in his game, but they way they have handled him this year wasn't because he was so clearly and obviously playing that bad. Downie has made more on ice mistakes than McGinn. McGinn doesn't even play.

How sweet was it to see Raffl score a crucial goal on a breakaway last night? Man, that kid deserved that for sure! He worked his butt off last night and was a threat every time he was out there.

 

I think what impresses me the most about Raffl is his puck control. He can shield it very well and keep the play alive. This guy is another gem that is underused on the 4th line, but I can understand why Berube has it that way for now. If you move him on the 3rd line - and I think a Read/Coots/Raffl line would be excellent - that means Downie goes to the 4th, and all of a sudden that 4th line is a much bigger liability out there. Would you trust Downie and Rinaldo when they get pinned in their zone? I wouldn't. 

 

I would guess that if they make the playoffs, Raffl will play more and more on the 3rd as the benches get shorter.

 

This player was a great find, and he brings a lot of tools and value to the Flyers.

He is playing really well, and I definitely want to resign him, but I can't say stuff like that until I get over the fear of him falling off the map. I need to see more than 1 season from him before I think he's another Leino, Dopita, or Thoresen. Love his play and definitely don't want him going anywhere, I just can't make any kind of final statements like that about guys like him.

I agree I want him playing with Read and Couturier on a regular basis.

You work for Jacoby & Meyers don't you

 

A couple posts back you said, "The me from back then has been proven wrong." No he wasn't, Claude simply started playing better. Why you don't comprehend that escapes me, but on well.

Giroux is known as Capitaine Claude in my house. My 5 year old loves the Flyers and Giroux. 

 

When I told her the other morning that Capitaine Claude scored the winning goal in OT, she was stoked. I showed her the replay and she was cheering.

 

I said "he's a good little French hockey player".

 

She said "You used to be a good little French hockey player too, papa."

 

I just smiled and said "Yes I was." So cute. 

She calls you papa? Jesus Christ that's adorable. It's something out of the early 1900s, but it's f-cking adorable.

@fan4ever

 

 I'm clearly biased, I love the Flyers and just not a Stallone fan.

You? Biased? Nooooo, you don't say?

What's wrong with being corrected?

I freely states back then that I thought he shouldn't be captain because it was too much and I just wanted him to refocus in scoring.

Now the me from back then has been proven wrong. He wasn't so wrong back then in his assessment, but the assumption has not proven out over time. Like to an extraordinary degree.

I was wrong. I did not say "Claude is a great captain and this team follows his lead for good or ill and he's just not playing well right now." I said he wasn't captain material and though I wanted him to stay, someone else should wear the C.

I was dead wrong. I'm not to candy assed to admit it either. I was wrong. Most of us were wrong.

 

There's no mistake to correct here. He was playing poorly at the beginning of the season and it was the second year in a row. That is a fact and there is nothing wrong at all in pointing that out.

@fanaticV3.0

 

I immediately thought of Buster Douglas beating the hell out of " little" Mike Tyson when I read your post.

And while I did mention Giroux's play that wasn't really the point of my post.  I was addressing your comment about  28 being named captain as not being merit based. ( clearly i'm paraphrasing ) .

 

 

Guys follow his lead and would whether or not he has a letter sewn on his sweater.  He is a guy that can lift a team to follow his example but effort alone doesn't get it done he needs to be an effective player on the score sheet to get the full effect.

Early in the season he wasn't playing well, and no one else was either, there was a lot going on with people and the team that we'll never really know. How bad was his injury , how out of skating shape were they, was there a mutiny against Laviolette ? Was 28 comfortable in his role ?  a ton of stuff.,

 

the criticism of his play was warranted no question.

Like it or not, he was the leader of the team once Pronger was LITR'd.  Watch the 24/7 vs the Rangers and it becomes even more clear.  

I know. That's exactly what I was responding to.

Putting this into the context of this season - if Giroux's injury was a contributing factor to his bad start and his bad start was part and parcel of the team's bad start - what's lost by having him sit and heal? They go 0-8 instead of 1-7? If the team is expecting "G to be G" and G can't "be G" - there is a possibility that the team could step up and play harder to make up for the temporary absence of Giroux. They might have done better. Again, just two more wins over that stretch and the team is in a Much Different playoff position - they would be, effectively, third in the Conference (84 points).

 

I think @Polaris922 has a great point about conditioning being an issue with this team under Laviolette (whether directly Lavy's fault or not). I think a lot of guys sort of took the lost half of last season off and never really got back to playing shape.

 

And subpar conditioning coupled with injury recovery simply compounds the problem.

 

Obviously, teams when they hit the playoffs are going to have a LOT of guys who probably aren't "100%" but are going to be out on the ice. I think that's fundamentally different than a player who might need an extra week or two during the season to really get back to top playing form.

Completely agreed.

I don't remember conditioning under Lavy being a topic of discussion until just this year. I'm not saying it wasn't, I just don't remember it coming up at all. Though, I'm inclined to hold someone accountable for their own level of physical fitness. 

while it is odd that a guy that had never been a captain as a hockey player was given the opportunity at the game's highest level, i disagree that it was without merit.

 

He (Giroux) was the guy that lifted his teammates 2 years ago, not Timmonen , not Briere, not Jagr.... Giroux was the guy that snapped his stick over the cross bar at the end of the game 5 vs Pgh and provided the spark that everyone in the building fed off of during the game 6 rout.  The fans ate it up and i bet the old man did too.

 

There might have been more "deserving " guys in the locker room to be named captain with the Pronger injury but the team clearly responded to Claude His compete level and his play that season in a tangible & visceral way. 

 

When he was going poorly no one stepped in  and picked up the slack on the ice, he's the straw that stirs the drink . He needed to learn that and then apply it to how he plays, it took a while but it seems as though if he's healthy he'll be the player we hoped he would be.

There is no tangible proof in a hot spell though. No matter how good a player is during that streak, it's still a very small span of time. It's like a fighter who beats a high quality opponent (and sometimes even wins a belt) and is never that good ever again. What Giroux is is still very up in the air imo. He's clearly a good player, but how good? Looks great now, looked great a few years back, but had a long stint in between where while not bad, definitely not "other level".

Bah, I was just piggy backing on your thoughts.

Not the greatest emoticons, huh? I wonder how difficult it is to get a bunch more added in.

I don't know, but the issue needs to be looked into. That wink is not nearly as playful and friendly looking as it needs to be. It looks like it's up to something.

I disagree with this notion that a player shouldn't be out there if he's not 100%.

 

Especially at the start of the season.  If you're injured and still better than other guys, AND you're not going to make things worse by playing, then you play.

 

If you'll make a minor injury a major injury by shooting yourself up with Cortisone that sucks calcium out of your bones and causes catastrophic hip bone failure (looking at you Rayzor) then it might have been better to let your leg heal through rest.  Hell you might have been healthy by the finals and we might have won a cup... but I digress.

 

Claude maybe had some issues to start, sure but if playing wasn't going to cause a more serious injury or slow his recovery, then how's playing him a bad thing? Because he's not a superstar and just a great player?  Meh.  Was playng McGinn over Giroux because G's finger wasn't better yet really the way to go?

 

I doubt it.  Even then I would have said so.  When I called for stripping his C it was because I was dumb enough to think the responsibilities and pressure of being a captain were distracting him from being a play maker.  Boy was I wrong.

I'm not sure if that is what anyone is saying? I know that's not how I meant it. You don't have to be 100%, but if you aren't healthy enough to make an impact, you shouldn't be playing. If your play is negatively affected by the injury, by all means heal up.

It beats the heck out of a statue of an actor...and a lousy one at that.

Personally, movies stick with me a lot longer than a single season by a particular sports team. I think they have a much wider reach too. More people remember a (nearly) 40-year old movie than they do a team's run from roughly the same amount of years ago.

@fanaticV3.0

 

I think @fan4ever hit the nail on the head. He was finally inducted into the HHoF .  He was an innovative coach and a good hockey man.  One of the first guys to use an assistant coach, study video and incorporate the good parts of the Euro game into the North American game.

 

I don't begrudge Snider or the Flyers for wanting to honor Shero.

There should have been a statue of him in front of the Spectrum 20 years ago...

 

 

That said, I agree it would be nice to live in the "now" so to speak and not look back 40 years to the last championship.

The timing makes sense given the HOF thing.

I'm very sick of that era though and I wasn't even around to see it though. I understanding the timing and can forgive that, I just don't want to hear about those teams multiple times a year though.

I also agree this should have happened years ago.

@fanaticV3.0

 

He was just inducted into the HHOF in 2013 so that is probably what prompted it to happen now, but he is a legend to any old time Flyers fan......

Yeah, that makes sense then.

No disrespect to the man, but does this mean anything to anyone? Is there a reason they are doing this and now (as opposed to 20+ years ago)? This would have made sense if he recently died or even a few years ago, but why now? Did they just need another reason to talk about Snyder's beloved Bullies again? Does anyone know the rationale behind it?

I don't know about anyone else, but I could go the rest of my life without hearing that era of "Flyers hockey" mentioned ever again.

Not for nothing, but......http://www.nhl.com/ice/player.htm?id=8451245#&navid=nhl-search

That's why I find so many people's opinion on fighting interesting.

If they changed their mind about fighting fair enough, because the game was a bit if a sideshow back then imo. If they never liked that era, also fair. But considering that team's popularity, I was a little confused about the anti fighting for fighting's sake stance by many.

Just to be clear, I wasn't disputing your point. You just happened to be the last post in the thread

Lazy ass

Is that even the right emoticon? It's not nearly as friendly looking as it should be.