Flyers traded .... but Captain G is still here

[GratefulFlyers]

12 hours ago, radoran said:

Made a luck run to a Cup Final.

 

Real good post sir - just one thing - if you mean this to say, in other words, "they didn't really deserve to be there" I have to take exception. I've seen this sentiment a number of times here and it always hits me wrong.

 

Naturally I don't know what your intention is, calling it a "luck run." However it is hard to read it as anything other than a slam, as if the Flyers benefited from luck more than other SC Final teams. I respect your opinion if you think they did but I don't share it.

 

I think something special happened to that team beginning when Boosh shut the door in the shootout vs. the Rangers on that last day of the season. That "something" happens to teams when they rise above what everyone believes is their fate. It happens to favorites too, in a different way, the other side of the pressure equation. Flyers in 2010 had none, Tampa this year had it all.

 

Long story short - one we all know - I don't think it was a "luck run" it was a team summoning greatness at exactly the right time. And hey don't forget it brought us Jody Shelley for a year or two! lol...god Homer!

[radoran]

2 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

That team's success was predicated on being good at hockey and not failing upwards. Which is how I interpret comments about that team getting "lucky".

 

1 minute ago, GratefulFlyers said:

Long story short - one we all know - I don't think it was a "luck run" it was a team summoning greatness at exactly the right time.

 

As much as I am loath to engage in significant debate over terminology from 11 years ago...

 

Catching lightning in a bottle is exactly what a "luck" run means to me.

 

 

Yes, the team came together as a hockey team and was greater than the sum of their parts. There was a veteran core that was two years away from a Conference Final.

 

But this was an 88-point team, riding two journeyman goaltenders, who qualified for the playoffs on the last day of the season, came back from 3-0 down in a series and 3-0 down in that series' Game 7, and beat an 8 seed in the Conference Final.

 

Obviously "skill" plays a role but there's more than a little "luck" involved in all of that coming together from where I sit.

 

YMMV. And I completely respect that.

[CoachX]

15 hours ago, elmatus said:

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. 

Really well said. I'm not sure how we know Primeau held people "accountable" or how Giroux "does or does not". I think its nothing more than passionate conjecture to support a point of view in support of a player you like, versus one you don't. Or it could be just for the player you want to blame now, to relieve emotional stress you feel from your team sucking. It has to be someone's fault

 

I do support the position that Giroux's leadership is not seen on the ice. this point of view lies in the eye of the beholder and makes sense to me. I don't see a guy doing enough. I base this off things I have seen him previously do. I don't see a guy who is so old he can't play anymore. The skill is there, so the tools. But where is the heart on the ice?

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

4 hours ago, Poconono said:

When all is said and done, we're gonna be bitchin' and moaning about whoever the next Flyer captain is and Giroux will be remembered fondly.  Just like Lindros, just like Brindy and just like so many of the goons Flyer fans wanted driven out of town.  Time heals all wounds.

I don't know of a single fan that wanted Brind'Amour dealt, especially for that locker room rat Primeau. If anything, I remember people wanted Clarke to find legitimate wingers to play alongside Brind'Amour, not have him continue to play with the likes of Rob DiMao or Trent Klatt.

[CoachX]

There may not have been a fan who wanted him gone, but there were a few in management who did.

 

You can't go around punching the franchise player and expect it to be okay

[radoran]

2 minutes ago, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

I don't know of a single fan that wanted Brind'Amour dealt, especially for that locker room rat Primeau.

 

To your point, Primeau scored the game winner in the record-setting marathon against Pittsburgh, was part of the "veteran core" that made the run to the Conference Final before the lockout, and captained a squad that never finished less than 2nd in the division.

 

Rod Brind'amour is in the Flyers' Hall of Fame.

[OccamsRazor]

6 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

Flacco v Hurts ?

that's a thing?

 

Yes. Sadly. But i knew that as soon as they started the Wentz/Hurts thing i knew this was coming.

 

It isn't that i am so upset they moved onto Wentz.

 

I'm more upset that they blew this whole thing up for Hurts...we blew it up and this is how we fill the hole.

 

Hey i am happy to be wrong but i can't see Hurts just being more accurate. But if he uses his brain he will learn to trust his TEs more...like the middle can be your friend. If he learns to just work the middle more the chains will move.

 

I have confidence (until i don't )in this head coaching group will run the ball more than Dug's and his gang did.

 

Sanders Scott Gainwell Johnson Huntley is a very eclectic group.

 

I'm interested in pushing their limits.

 

I mean we know the Sanders extension talk is on the horizon might as well ride the bronco and see what he can do.

 

And lawd forbid if it isn't the yearly who will emerge from this WR group.

 

And for the record i am not looking forward to Joe throwing it...hell if i knew it would come down to this i would have rather they just brought Foles back.

 

The division is up for grabs. it would be ashamed to not win it this year despite the issues at hand.

 

Guess we'll see how it goes tonight. Sucks that Devonta is already dinged up. they need him to come up big this year if they want to take a step forward even with the QB is question...

 

 

 

Edited August 12, 2021 by OccamsRazor
#boubonup

[mojo1917]

1 hour ago, CoachX said:

I do support the position that Giroux's leadership is not seen on the ice. this point of view lies in the eye of the beholder and makes sense to me. I don't see a guy doing enough. I base this off things I have seen him previously do. I don't see a guy who is so old he can't play anymore.

The Charlie O'Connor article might be a good read for you.  Also defining  what you look for when you're assessing leadership on the ice would be helpful. 

The article talks about how Giroux's game has changed because he isn't the guy that can carry a team all year anymore.

COC pulls out the dreaded advanced metrics in the article to talk about how G is still pretty good at hockey- a clear top line league player even at 33 and even hints that he's only over paid by a little at this time. 

 

Here is the link again. 

https://twitter.com/TheAthleticNHL/status/1425509819625009156?s=20

 

Edited August 12, 2021 by mojo1917

[Howie58]

This is one where I see alignment between player, agent, and team.  If I were G and the season was a bummer, I might want out.  If things go well, I might want to stay.  Fletcher has to "remain vigilant" about performance and the salary cap.  One could argue the Captaincy from a number of angles.  G is a pillar.  On the other hand--maybe it's time for generational shift and change.  

 

One thing in his favor is position flexibility. He is less likely to crowd out an up-and-comer with ability to move.  In terms of playing time--he can do more on the specialty side and less 5 on 5.  

 

All in--I am less worried about the G situation than some pundits and might worry more about our Selke winner get a stash that becomes unsustainable with age or injury.