ruxpin

Yes. But that's the thing, we're all being labeled as negative because we dane to be even "cautious" because of over a decade of "we've changed X, so it's all good now." I agree with pretty much everything you said. But I think the attitude of "it's negative if it's not blindly rah rah" just reeks of intellectual incapacitation.

Who would know? Because it's Tuesday and Monday didn't happen/doesn't matter.

Fair point. But it doesn't matter because it wasn't today. Today is all that matters.

So that means you've hosted several...oh wait. It doesn't matter, rad, history resets when the sun goes down and nothing that happened before sunrise matters. We all know that creation reset at the end of each day. I clearly remember reading in Genesis 1:14, at the beginning of the 4th day, God woke and said "What the #### was I doing? Doesn't matter, that was yesterday. I'm going for tacos."

It's nice to see you're willing to admit it. It's the first step in healing. See you at the parade.

We also dumped on it as prediction and in real time, because it was honest and realistic. Reporting the actual news may or may not be a waste of time; I'll let you decide for yourself. From my vantage, the delusional rah rah is the waste of time. That said, I think most of the people you're currently arguing with are actually cautiously optimistic. That's actually a drastic improvement from the crap we've historically been force fed. I mean you do you, but allow those of us who remember yesterday the same courtesy. You're more than welcome to your optimism. It comes across as Stockholm Syndrome, quite frankly, but you're welcome to it. If you can't take the realism and want to threaten to leave because some realism threatens your perception of a world of purple unicorns and Care Bears and rainbows, I'd suggest the Flyers Facebook page might be the place for you. But just a heads up: the world didn't just start today. Yesterday (let alone several thousand yesterdays) absolutely matters.

LMFAO! (Honestly laughing with you, not at you. That was funny)

No. They all suck and have always sucked. But have faith and be positive and try one, because their marketing department says otherwise and they have a goofy mascot.

Exactly. And when Hextall was hired. And when Clarke stepped down...er...up...er...oh, whatever... When Lavvy, Berube, Hakstol, Vigneaut... And when each of the last (what is it?) 72 goalies arrived. And one-skate boy.

This is true. Or, so I've been told enough that I believe it must be. The problem is that I'm to the place of "show me." The reason for this is that when the Flyers have "changed" previously I was conditioned by literally 30 years of the variation of a theme of crap. Coach X is hired but has a track record and I'm told history is not pre-amble and "see what he can do here! He hasn't coached a game yet!" Stunningly, history is preamble. Substitute "coach" for player or GM and the same has repeated. Or a player doesn't have a bad track-record but he's now way past his prime but signed for 25 year old money and expectations. "Stop being negative!" A year later? The same person who told me to not be negative is complaining louder than I am. No, I'm not always right. It was late September 1988. Some girl fell in my lap and I thought she was awesome. I married her a couple years later. 30 years later, man, it kind of balances out all the times I was (accidentally) right! I'm actually bullish on Danny Jones and am okay with most everything done so far. Things I'm not so sure about, I'm only not so sure about--I don't hate them nor have a burning desire to scream, "this is going to blow up!" Torts could end world hunger I won't like him. But for the time being he's not even on my radar as a concern. From my vantage, he's surprisingly right for the moment. But winning the cup or even competing for it isn't on my radar, so it's patience time so long as things are heading in the right direction--and despite small nagging concerns, I believe they are. So, I'm kind of in your boat about the "positive" but I don't believe the last 10(PLUS) years no long matter until they actually don't. So far so good, though.

Oh joy. It's my entire "new content" page, driving actual relevant stuff either way down the page or not at all. Your spamming truly sucks.

You didn't get any responses the last several times you posted this because literally no one gives a crap about your mindless drivel. It's in way of actual posts on the "new content" feed. It's NOT new content. It's a repost of the same crap that was in the way before that anyone can find with a simple wiki search. How about a list of your posts that had the slightest value. Here it is:

This isn't content! It's mindlessly spamming the board. How about go copy and paste a spaghetti and meatball recipe somewhere on Facebook or something else equally inspiring. God, you're annoying! Quit spamming!

Yeah, I like the team itself. If everyone meshes well together, they're a nice team with crap goaltending. Ottawa--who actually got the lesser of the Diarrhetic Duo--also has a descent lineup with questionable goaltending. I kind of like Sogaard, but I don't want him starting 50 games. He'll have to with Korpse as his creasemate. Gotta think Columbus finishes better than Ottawa but they'll be in the same neighborhood. Good comparison to Detroit, too. I like their goaltending better. Detroit has some nice things going on with their lineup, but as was said on the Detroit write-up thread: their defense is a huge question. Things could go well and they're the best of these three. Or they're right there. If Columbus's defense can improve and hold and Merz can at least stay healthy then who knows? They're headed in the right direction as a team, and will be better than last year, but I think likely still bottom ten.

Yeah. All of this. Tarasev is still waiver exempt. I know they have $5M+ invested in Pelvis, but they seemingly have everyone signed and $4M in cap space ($5M+ if they send Tarasev to the Monsters). It feels like there should be better options than Pelvis still out there if they wanted to make a move. Unless they feel like they're just not there yet either way so wait. Gaudreau isn't getting any younger, though.

Breaking News: https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-draft-maple-leafs-pick-auston-matthews-first/c-281038834 on Friday. "Toronto is the hockey mecca; that's the hockey universe right there," Matthews said. "They sure do love the Maple Leafs. They are a very good sports city in general, but especially with the Leafs." Matthews is the seventh United States-born player selected with the first pick and the first since Patrick Kane was chosen by the Chicago Blackhawks in 2007. After hearing his name called by Maple Leafs director of player personnel Mark Hunter, Matthews hugged his mother and father....

.

Good post all around. I agree; they have jumped the shark. Or, Oni prygnuli na akulu.

I'm okay if he moves to wing, but I like him better at center. He just needs wingers that will show up (cough cough Farabee).

I'm not bullish on over 100 points. I think they may sneak into the playoffs as an 8-seed, but I just don't like this team. Too much has to go just right with their kids. I think Huberdeau will likely be better (could he be worse?) but no matter how you slice and dice it, Barkov does not play for Calgary, so you won't see Huberdeau return to Florida production. I am not, nor have I ever been, a fan of Markstrom. He's not terrible but can be. And I think two seasons ago was his career high water mark. He's going to have to be at least that good because I still think their defense is suspect and their forward lines are decent but mismatched players. The middle to bottom of the conference is terrible, so things could go well enough that they get in, but I would not think they have any contender qualities. I don't think they can skate with the stronger teams.

When you break it down as you do, it's hard to argue individual points. I think they get in as one of the two wild cards and it's solely on the idea that what much of what you say is true, they'll have much better goaltending next year. That, and the fact I'm not at all bullish on Ottawa.

1:20, 1:28, and 1:39, I see nose/forehead as initial point of contact. I don't think there's anything incidental about it. Possibly accidental, but not incidental. Not completely buying accidental, either. I'd say get your head up, but on this particular play it's not like he was carrying the puck and admiring his handiwork. The puck was loose and bouncing, and he was trying to find it corral it. I'm by no means a Lindros defender, but that would probably be a suspension in today's game except that he's a Penguin so he'd get a medal.

How quickly you forget Jon Sim!