ruxpin

@radoran Send this to the Flyers. This is my problem both last year and this with Lavy's style of play. They do well early in the season and shoot out to the front of the pack and lead or are near the top in scoring (they were last year, too, if you remember). This is all done while other teams are gelling their defense and coordinating how they're going to play when the games get big. The Flyers? Just run and gun. So later in the year when the other teams' defenses have come together and defense becomes what wins games, the Flyers can no longer score at the rate they were and they haven't spent any real effort on figuring out their defense so you see the record start to fall and we have this same discussion year in year out. I don't want to go back to the "sit back" mentality we had under Stevens. I have to admit that the "run and gun" is in many ways more entertaining to watch. But it doesn't win when it counts...as you accurately point out. I wouldn't mind a "puck-hunting" mentality that derives from sound defense. That WILL get you offense while protecting your back end. It will also give the goalie a CHANCE to steal a game once in awhile.

I don't disagree. On the other hand, I don't know that we're giving them the opportunity to "steal" any games. It would be nice if they cut down on the goofy goals, but other goalies give up goofy goals on occasion (whatsisname last night in Detroit, for example) and their team rallies around them and overcomes it rather than using it as an excuse to lose. But with the incessant bumbleF**king in the defensive end, bad decisions with the puck, bad decisions without the puck, lousy coverage, forwards leaving too quickly, etc., you can have "steals" like Bob did early against the Rangers the other night and it doesn't matter. There's really only so much a goalie should be expected to steal. With this defense, it would amount to more than just stealing. It would be felony grand theft. Agreed.

@radoran Not sure about the sqare peg/round hole thing. I get what you're saying, though, and it's certainly possible. I just don't think they have the defense. They have their best defenseman on the shelf. They have another really good defenseman who is having a pretty good season but who is on the backside of his career. After that? I cannot say I am impressed. Mezz, Carle, and Coburn are all simply okay but inconsistent. With Pronger being out, they're all probably a notch above where they should be in terms of responsibility and ice time. Then you have a rotation of rookies and Lilja. Again, the rookies are going to show signs of being good but also be inconsistent. The problem is that they are all consistently inconsistent at different times, so you have the incessant breakdowns, lapses of coverage, and flat out bone-headed decisions we're seeing. In the meantime, you have forwards simply leaving the zone or moving for the breakout entirely too quickly. I'm going to chalk that part up to Lavy's system and an example of your square peg/round hole thing. Since they have inexperienced or only average d-men out there, they need the forwards' help. The "system" is built for run and gun, so they're not giving that help. As you said, any goalie is going to suffer on this team. In the Ranger game, Bob made absurd stops early, but since you cannot do that all game, he left in a couple and right away "eh Bob doesn't make the big save." Is there any rule about playing with 4 skaters and two goalies? Because short of that, until they fix the defense, neither goalie is going to look all that good.

@Vanflyer I just think it's his ceiling.

FYI...I picked the Flyers with all my remaining tokens in Pick'em. So the Flyers are pretty much screwed tonight.

What about Lappy to coach the PK? Maybe a Hatcher or Desjardins on the defense.

If Shelley is going to do anything with the locker room door, I'm hoping it's walking out through it never to return.

Well, keep the faith because Bob is probably the best option we have right now. Although I do think (hope?) that Bryz will be better next year. In any case, calling Bob a career backup and answering the question "who else do we bring in" are entirely two different exercises. Bryz and Bob are it, and I don't see how any other options are possible. I suppose they could Mogilny Bryz, but that would be a horrible mistake. Short of that, I don't think you can spend anymore salary on that position. Best guess is you shore up the defense and hope it's enough to compensate for only average, inconsistent, goaltending. I cannot believe Flyer fans STILL have to talk about this. Years and years of the front office not trying, then they go out and sign a "top flight" goalie only to find out they've bought a grounded SST. And here we are...

In some cases, that might work, but it's always better for your leader to actually be on the ice. But in this particular case, it's my understanding that Pronger really isn't up to even doing that. The guy is apparently having a really bad time of it.

Agreed.

Hi Doom, Hard to tell on here sometimes. Was that to me? Don't give up developing Bob, but he's a career backup. We need to work on getting a starter if Bryz isn't going to be it, because Bob won't be.

If you're in a fantasy league that rewards penalty minutes as well as scoring, Hartnell is gold.

Bob is a backup = Nitty. That is all.

Not sure, doom. But the PK sucks, too, so...

No. He is not. It's as dumb as hiring an offensive line coach as your defensive coordinator. It's just plain stupid. As for the team, I think we're seeing from the team quite a bit better than what should have realistically been expected coming into the season. Unfortunately, some of our weaknesses were supposed to be covered by a #1 goalie and a #1 defenseman. One forgot how to play and the other is hurt.

I know some of the offseason moves made it seem as if they were in "win now" mode, but I think with all the rookies on the team that thought was a little foolish.

I read the Timonen thing that Sheridan wrote ( http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/flyers/20120212_Phil_Sheridan__After_loss_to_Rangers__Timonen_offers_harsh_assessment_of_Flyers.html ) Interesting that he mentions system...as noted on this site...but I also find it stunning that he seems to call out the goaltending by being so complimentary of the Rags' goalie. Consistency. Consistency. Consistency. To be honest, I don't share the criticism about lack of effort. Not in the way I saw it the past few seasons, anyway. I just see a team with a bunch of young kids who ARE going to be inconsistent, especially as the season progresses and the exhaustion sets in. I think Holmgren HAD to expect this a little but thought he was covered by his goalie signing and Pronger/Timonen on the back end. Best laid plans, and all that. Some of the very things that have made them competitive (some really successful rookie years) are the same things that on the flip side are weaknesses (too many rookies). The Flyers just don't have some of the tools right now to cover up glaring weaknesses.

LOL Exactly who I had in mind while raising my concern (not sure it's "concern") about Columbus.

Fair points. Agreed. Just trying to give Columbus the benefit of the doubt (the city, not the franchise).

LOL @ "Hartnell Down!"

Completely agree that will be the sum reality of it (a chance to cheer again, and then back to slush). But my point--fear?--is it's not "completely aside from that" from the league office point of view (I agree that in reality it is completely as you describe). It's an attempt by the league office to keep hockey relevant in an area in which it will become less and less so due to management/ownership incompetence. It's a shame, too, because hockey could actually do well there if it wasn't run by Larry, Curly, and Moe. I don't know how I feel in theory about the league simply taking over an organization that has proven itself horribly incompetent. Who defines that and what's the criteria? But it just seems like Columbus would be a good case.

Interesting topic. Keep it the way it is. I suppose I haven't seen a large enough sampling, but I don't recall seeing many concussions that had anything whatsoever to do with stretch passes or a lack of a red line. I see a lot of hits from blind sides in the high slot or elsewhere in one of the defensive zones. There are some in the neutral zone, but again, I don't think very many have anything to do with the lack of a red line. Doom88 and others are correct about better helmets, etc., but I think as they learn more they'll realize this is about the neck and not specifically the head. (obviously, the resulting concussion is in the head, but I'm betting they find that the root cause is from the neck/spinal cord). They need to figure out a way to support the neck better, and I'm not sure how they do that and not restrict peripheral vision (which may actually end up causing more injury.

Just clarify...my slam wasn't on Columbus. Hockey could very well work there. It won't with the current ownership and management of the Blue Jackets. And now the league will try to artificially pump it up rather than making sure the product is good.

And so the league push to try to save a sh!tty organization in Columbus begins. Want to save the franchise? Take it from the owners and sell it.

Tell me you're not serious. If you are, I have only one question: exactly how hard did you hit your head? In a list that includes Jeff Hackett, Leighton is the worst goalie to ever wear a Flyer uniform. I want nothing to do with him.