Flyers: State of the organization...

[radoran]

12 minutes ago, Mad Dog said:

You have your MVP playing injured for most of the season, risking a long-term injury... Why?

 

Because they're "only four (five) points out of a playoff spot."

 

[GratefulFlyers]

@Mad Dog Great post I would only split JVR and Konecny into 2 different camps. I realize you were talking trade value so I'm not contradicting you. Konecny doesn't rate top line minutes these days and his trade value is low prob a 2R if that. But I believe (for whatever that's worth lol) that Konecny can be another Marchand. Truly. JVR is JVR. He scores in bunches then disappears for weeks.

 

Konecny can be an animal out there - in a good way. He's one of the few who seems to really want the puck, and has the hands to be a scoring threat. Not so much lately (last year and this year) but he's got it in him. Morgan Frost looks like he has that same GimmeThePuck mentality.

 

There's good young players in the organization but I no longer expect them to develop their potential in Philly. It just seems over and over the skill guys - whether it's scoring, defense whatever - they hit a wall in Philly and their best year is their rookie season. WTF is that all about? Exceptions like Couturier are few and far between.

 

[Digityman]

1 hour ago, Mad Dog said:

I don't know what can be gained by trading Giroux.  You would have to get creative to trade him in such a way that you gain much, let alone not lose. He is a fan favorite and still a good damned player.  So if you trade him for a bunch of bodies, you better make sure those are good prospects and high draft picks. So if the Flyers decide to move away from him at this point, at the very least they need to make sure they are getting quality, not quantity back.  And I won't mind if that quality is a project and doesn't materialize in the next 2 years. Unfortunately, taking into consideration Flyers' history and mindset, I have no confidence that that's what they will do. 

 

I think the current idea is to have conversations with Giroux about a trade, he then resigns with the team in the summer as a free agent.   Whether or not that's real, I don't know.

[radoran]

19 minutes ago, Digityman said:

I think the current idea is to have conversations with Giroux about a trade, he then resigns with the team in the summer as a free agent.   Whether or not that's real, I don't know.

 

"Claude, we'd like to send you to a place where you will have a real chance to win and be successful on the ice. And then we'd like you to come back here..."

 

[mojo1917]

12 minutes ago, Digityman said:

 

I think the current idea is to have conversations with Giroux about a trade, he then resigns with the team in the summer as a free agent.   Whether or not that's real, I don't know.

I think a Giroux trade and resign would do a couple of things for the organization. 

1 He's done being captain.

2 His new contract will be more palatable. 

3 the pick and prospect could help speed up the rebuilding/tool whatever we're going to call it.

4 He'll have been a part of a different room and he'll see how a more successful team behaves.

 

The team needed him to be a Pronger type, and that is just not who he is.  So, I can appreciate the leopard not changing its spots but, management should have tried to bring in a vocal type to help with accountability.

Once Timonen and then Simmonds were gone the team really fell apart, I think they played a larger role in the room than we previously thought. 

 

Anyway, we have to hope that Fletcher can pry a ++ prospect, a 1st pick maybe something else out of the teams that could use a play driving top 6 forward. 

I've seen Minnesota, NYR (ick) Boston and Ottawa mentioned. 

I think if it's Ottawa, he's there for good.

I think he would be a good fit in St Louis or Colorado also.

That's playing style and not salary cap considered.

 

 

 

[flyercanuck]

2 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

@BobbyClarkeFan16

Chuck Fletcher and his staff have completed a review and implemented many changes to address much of what you're suggesting.

They especially paid attention to player development and creating an identity. 

 

 And yet player development is the worst I've ever seen as a Flyer fan, and there is no identity. None. Other than "Be mediocre!"

 

2 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

 

In August of 21 there were many a Flyers Daily podcasts that spoke to the organizational changes and make up. Episodes  8/17 , 8/19, 8/29 and 8/31 all mentioned forms of organizational changes, and introduced new behind the scenes people like adding Mike O'Connell to the advisory staff.

 

 The same Mike O'Connell who got raped in the Joe Thornton trade and led his team to 1, that's one playoff win in his tenure as GM. He should fit right in with Fletcher.

 

2 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

Also, I don't think change on the scale you're proposing happens rapidly. So whatever adjustments Chuck made won't be readily evident also having the entire system racked with serious injuries hasn't helped. The guys they want to develop are not playing. 

 

It could have been that Chuck made these suggestions and then Homer and Clarkie said thanks and didn't move on any of them. 

 

I've listened to enough interviews with the man (Fletcher) to understand he's not cool with the team sucking and has ideas of what needs to improve. 

This narrative that Fletcher is some idiot automaton that does the bidding of two alumni stooges just doesn't square with anything I've heard him say publicly. 

 

 Well the team he's managing has got older fast, and worse. His trades so far have either been ok or terrible. His FA signing have been lame to terrible. I' don't think Fletcher is an idiot of a human (I mean the graduated from Harvard) I just think he's an idiot of a GM (his track record speaks for himself)

 

2 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

 

Also and this is not addressed to you directly.

The fact that the hall of fame ceremony was held at 5:30 pm on a weeknight during a homestand that had two weekend games was tone deaf and idiotic.

I watched the Raiders honor John Madden last night and he hadn't been their coach for 40 years. The way the corporate side has treated the legacy of the team is shameful. 

I don't give two rat's farts about the Kate Smith statue but I do think the cost saving measures that cut loose longtime team alumni ambassadors is shortsighted and obtuse. 

I think this deliberate benign neglect of the team's legacy especially around Ed Snider is another symptom of the franchise's rot.

 

I agree. 

[Digityman]

24 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

"Claude, we'd like to send you to a place where you will have a real chance to win and be successful on the ice. And then we'd like you to come back here..."

You're right, it doesn't sound like a great deal for him hockey wise but....  his very young family is here.   I'm not saying he will do it, I'm just saying that's the current conversation/theory that's going around.    Think of it this way, if he wants to retire a 'Flyer' then what better way to increase the teams chances of winning then to go somewhere else for 3 months (increase his chance of a cup) and for the Flyers to get picks/players that might it make it possible before he retires?   It's not that far fetched.

Edited January 10, 2022 by Digityman

[radoran]

43 minutes ago, Digityman said:

 It's not that far fetched.

 

It's not far fetched at all.

 

I just think it's sad...

Edited January 10, 2022 by radoran

[mojo1917]

5 minutes ago, flyercanuck said:

And yet player development is the worst I've ever seen as a Flyer fan, and there is no identity. None. Other than "Be mediocre!"

So the changes made in August should have borne fruit by now ?

I don't know if I think 5 months is enough time to completely change an organization in ways that outsiders would notice. 

Maybe I'm being too lenient ? What we're talking about changing will realistically take years to notice not months.

 

The "old guys" you love to talk about are signed for this year, and they were cheap.

They weren't signed to be "the guys" they were signed to help the guys who are already here and aren't improving. What does it say about our guys that the old guys have jumped them on the depth chart?

Fletcher wasn't thinking Yandle is the missing piece, he was thinking he's a guy that can keep a seat warm until one of our two AHL guys are ready.

Same with Brassard. 

Injuries and Je ne sait quois  have really exacerbated the organizations dearth of talent. 

 

 

[flyercanuck]

25 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

So the changes made in August should have borne fruit by now ?

I don't know if I think 5 months is enough time to completely change an organization in ways that outsiders would notice. 

Maybe I'm being too lenient ? What we're talking about changing will realistically take years to notice not months.

 

The "old guys" you love to talk about are signed for this year, and they were cheap.

They weren't signed to be "the guys" they were signed to help the guys who are already here and aren't improving. What does it say about our guys that the old guys have jumped them on the depth chart?

Fletcher wasn't thinking Yandle is the missing piece, he was thinking he's a guy that can keep a seat warm until one of our two AHL guys are ready.

Same with Brassard. 

Injuries and Je ne sait quois  have really exacerbated the organizations dearth of talent. 

 

 

 

You'd like to think if the GM had a clue (which he never did in Minnesota) that changes that were supposed to be for the better, on a team that was mediocre when the GM took over, would have the team doing at least a bit better by now. Instead, it looks like they've taken two giant leaps backward. Followed by two more. 

 

The old guys are for the most part, terrible. His big FA signing is looking older than anyone and signed for 7 years. His 31 year old defenceman with 6 years on his contract has a whole 4 games under his belt as a Flyer. 

What does it say that since Fletcher took over, our what looked to  be #1 young defenceman now plays like crap? Or what looked to be our young top line winger now plays like crap? Or what looked to be an up and coming young team now isn't so young, and plays like crap?

 You know what else has exacerbated our talent? Lousy trades. 

[mojo1917]

@flyercanuck

we see this differently.

I would trade Patrick again everyday that ends in "Y"

I would trade Myers too. 

The player they were traded for is better than both of them. 

He may play for the Flyers and one day we'll see.

The injury he has now was not something he "battled" throughout his career .

The two injuries that cost him time previously were not chronic in nature- but one-offs.

That was a risk that was worth taking and may yet pan out.

 

Ghost?

He's no Jacob Slavin, and he was a redundant player here whose ice time would be diminishing he cost a fair amount of $ vs the cap and was malcontent. Perhaps he is clairvoyant?

 

I wouldn't have traded him and picks-but that was the league at the time.

It may continue to be the league going forward as long as there is COVID.

 

Last year's team was miserable and something needed to be done. This year's team as it was constructed has played for 3 games. 

Terrible luck and the whole group is like a beat-down dog after two years daily whippings.

 

Fletcher at least addressed the issue, the changes he made haven't had the chance to work. 

It's different than being an idiot who ****s everything up everywhere he goes. 

 

 

 

Edited January 10, 2022 by mojo1917

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

44 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

So the changes made in August should have borne fruit by now ?

I don't know if I think 5 months is enough time to completely change an organization in ways that outsiders would notice. 

Maybe I'm being too lenient ? What we're talking about changing will realistically take years to notice not months.

 

The "old guys" you love to talk about are signed for this year, and they were cheap.

They weren't signed to be "the guys" they were signed to help the guys who are already here and aren't improving. What does it say about our guys that the old guys have jumped them on the depth chart?

Fletcher wasn't thinking Yandle is the missing piece, he was thinking he's a guy that can keep a seat warm until one of our two AHL guys are ready.

Same with Brassard. 

Injuries and Je ne sait quois  have really exacerbated the organizations dearth of talent. 

 

 

In fairness, Fletcher could have revamped the entire front office with regards to good, young hockey minds and he continued with old boys club. Mike O'Connell stunk in Boston, so Fletcher brings him here because "he's a good hockey mind." Then, look at the head coach in Lehigh Valley. While Laperriere might be a good guy from all accounts,  he's never been a head coach anywhere and now he's given the responsibility to groom or prospects and get them ready for the NHL. Nevermind that Fletcher didn't target a great junior or NCAA coach who has a history of taken by development, he chose sobriety in house because 'it was easy.'

 

So, while Fletcher talks about culture and changing the development process, he brought in guys who absolutely suck our have no experience in development. If one couldn't see that this was going to end poorly, then I don't know what to say. 

 

As for Fletcher and his offseason moves,  Ristolainen was the worst top 4 defenseman available and he paid a premium to get him. Honestly, I don't have a problem if Fletcher would have used that premium in a premium defenseman, but he used it on arguably the worst top 4 defender in the game and that's saying something. And don't get me started on Gostisbehere. He was made a scapegoat for the ineptitude of Vigneault, Therrien and Yeo. Tourigny in Phoenix seems to have an idea on how to use Ghost and he's had a great bounce back season. 

 

Then he deals for Ryan Ellis, who gets hurt in training camp, ends up playing and then gets hurt again, plays one game after an extended absence and then is injured again and the response right now is that the healing process is taking longer than anticipated. Did he not read the medical records on Ellis? And if the healing process is taking so long, why do they not have Ellis seeing a surgeon? This is a premium asset that they treat like garbage. 

 

The only move Fletcher made that worked was Atkinson, but even then, it's not as if Voracek is playing poorly in Columbus either. I suppose you could add Martin Jones to the list,  but even a warm cadaver was an upgrade over Brian Elliot. 

 

As for the 'old guys', look at what Fletcher has said when n they signed Thompson. They brought him in because 'he's the kind of guy you bring in at the trade deadline and lay a premium for.' Or look at Yandle and how he's a 'great locker room presence.' So good that the defence is one of the worst in the league. 

 

I gave Fletcher a chance and after seeing him bungle things,  he needs to go. He might have great ideas, but he's brought in the wrong people. And that just doesn't fall on Fletcher. That falls on his assistant GM and his pro scouts as well. They all need to be fired 

[GrittyForever]

idk, Buffalo's been trying the "young hockey minds" instead of "old boys" for over a decade now and how's that worked out for them? A lot of people thought Pittsburgh would fade and they brought in the "old boy" Burke and they're looking pretty good right now. 

 

imo it's about good scouting, player development and creating and then sticking with a team identity. 

 

Flyers used to have an identity (when they were good) but what are they now? idk. They're sort of in between but not really anything and thus they're close to the playoffs but not really in them.

 

My fear is this will just continue as they will think "we're close" and nothing much will change. 

[Mad Dog]

11 minutes ago, GrittyForever said:

idk, Buffalo's been trying the "young hockey minds" instead of "old boys" for over a decade now and how's that worked out for them?

 

Which is why  despite a notion that this is blueprint for rebuild, this is a blueprint to stupidity, actually. Nobody does that, except Buffalo.  You do need your veterans to teach, mentor, lead by example, and provide direction. And that's why having Giroux on the team is invaluable.  

[radoran]

I'm going out on a limb and I'm going to say that "the plan" to start the season for the Flyers didn't involve:

Max Willman
Gerald Mayhew

Jackson Cates
Patrick Brown

Zack MacEwen

Kevin Connauton
Nick Seeler

 

much less an injured Ryan Ellis or Scott Laughton as the first line center.

 

I'm no fan of ol' Fletch and don't have lots of rosy things to say about the organization* but to act as if the team that has been iced was in any way, shape, or form "the plan" of the current GM is simply disingenuous in the extreme.

 

Yandle on PP1 is an obvious mistake - but it's not one of the Vigneault Mistakes that Yeo has taken it upon himself to "correct."

 

Brassard actually filled in fairly nicely for a short period with ol' Hayseyeyey out, but was never supposed to be a long term 2C as much as a bottom 6 depth player.

 

Gotstobethere is sitting with 23 points in 33 games, yes, and he's also a -10. As I read it, his six PPP indicate that while he's been on the ice for 13 ES goals for he's also been on the ice for 23 ES goals against which is what got him his ticket to Arizona. For those keeping score at home, the Coyotes are still the worst team in the league.

[radoran]

1 minute ago, Mad Dog said:

You do need your veterans to teach, mentor, lead by example, and provide direction. And that's why having Giroux on the team is invaluable.  

 

If Giroux had ever lead anyone, anywhere I might be more on board with this than I am. And I'm not.

 

He is the least impactful captain in franchise history, and has shown me nothing that indicates that he's "the guy" to "teach, mentor, lead by example, and provide direction." In fact, I've seen teams under his leadership fold tents, slink away, and quit more than I remember them for anything else*.

 

To be clear, I think he wants to be "that guy" I just don't really think he has any idea how to be "that guy." I only have the past ten years to go by, though...

 

 

* there was that one time where they won a playoff series so there is that, I guess...

[Mad Dog]

14 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

If Giroux had ever lead anyone, anywhere I might be more on board with this than I am. And I'm not.

 What are you basing this on?  His demeanor? He is not the most vocal; I do agree.  But you don't necessarily need that to lead. There are quiet leaders. Joe Sakic was one of them.  I am hearing interviews of the players, and it leads me to believe that Giroux is very similar.

[Mad Dog]

23 minutes ago, radoran said:

Gotstobethere is sitting with 23 points in 33 games, yes, and he's also a -10.

 And you don't think playing on an atrocious Arizona team has something to with that?  What do you think his +/- would be if he has been paired with someone like Justin Faulk in St. Louis or, say, Jaccob Slavin in Carolina?

[radoran]

15 minutes ago, Mad Dog said:

 What are you basing this on?  His demeanor? He is not the most vocal; I do agree.  But you don't necessarily need that to lead. There are quiet leaders. Joe Sakic was one of them.  I am hearing interviews of the players, and it leads me to believe that Giroux is very similar.

 

I mean, I base it on watching the team he's the captain of for the past 10 years.

 

I am hard pressed to find one instance where I've been impressed with him "as a leader" over that time span. Admittedly my view is somewhat jaundiced, but being captain of the worst stretch of organizational* hockey (#notallhisfault) doesn't help my perspective.

 

7 minutes ago, Mad Dog said:

 And you don't think playing on an atrocious Arizona team has something to with that?  What do you think his +/- would be if he has been paired with someone like Justin Faulk in St. Louis or, say, Jaccob Slavin in Carolina?

 

Dude's a -41 for his career. Had two seasons of -20+ while playing for the Flyers.

 

It's not exactly a secret he's not great in his own end.

 

I'm not saying that paying Arizona to take him was a Good Move by any stretch, but the idea that somehow his QB of PP1 would be a panacea for the Flyers' ills doesn't resonate with me. Nor, for that matter, do Phillippe "who?" Myers or Nolan "What?" Patrick.

 

The idea he might be better with a better pairing partner is true of just about every defenceman who has ever laced up skates.

[flyercanuck]

1 hour ago, mojo1917 said:

@flyercanuck

we see this differently.

I would trade Patrick again everyday that ends in "Y"

I would trade Myers too. 

The player they were traded for is better than both of them. 

He may play for the Flyers and one day we'll see.

The injury he has now was not something he "battled" throughout his career .

The two injuries that cost him time previously were not chronic in nature- but one-offs.

That was a risk that was worth taking and may yet pan out.

 

 The Ellis trade is probably the best one Fletcher has made as Flyer GM. The fact that he's played 4 games shows the wizardry we have at the helm. There's also the 5 more years on that contract that odds are, aren't going to work in the Flyers favor.

 His next best deal is Gudas for Niskanen. We got 68 games out of that one. 

 Atkinson for Voracek was fine, though we add a year of contract there as well. 

 The rest of his trades basically resulted in flushing draft picks down the toilet. 

 

 

1 hour ago, mojo1917 said:

 

Ghost?

He's no Jacob Slavin, and he was a redundant player here whose ice time would be diminishing he cost a fair amount of $ vs the cap and was malcontent. Perhaps he is clairvoyant?

 

I wouldn't have traded him and picks-but that was the league at the time.

It may continue to be the league going forward as long as there is COVID.

 

 So if that's the league, how come Fletcher is never on the receiving end of those draft picks and players? Seems he's always giving them away. 

 

1 hour ago, mojo1917 said:

 

Last year's team was miserable and something needed to be done. This year's team as it was constructed has played for 3 games. 

Terrible luck and the whole group is like a beat-down dog after two years daily whippings.

 

 I agree. It's funny how he took over the franchise three years ago.

 

1 hour ago, mojo1917 said:

 

Fletcher at least addressed the issue, the changes he made haven't had the chance to work. 

It's different than being an idiot who ****s everything up everywhere he goes. 

 

 

 

 

 Well all I have to judge him on is his near decade in Minnesota where he managed to do...nothing, and his 3 years in Philly where he's managed to take a mediocre young team and turn them into a worse, albeit older team. And he was even spotted a goalie and a top pairing defenceman...something pretty rare in Philly.

That just doesn't scream "Genius" to me. 

 There's a lot of good fans on here that follow the Wild who pretty much to a T warned us when we hired him. They weren't wrong. 

 

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

1 hour ago, GrittyForever said:

idk, Buffalo's been trying the "young hockey minds" instead of "old boys" for over a decade now and how's that worked out for them? A lot of people thought Pittsburgh would fade and they brought in the "old boy" Burke and they're looking pretty good right now. 

 

imo it's about good scouting, player development and creating and then sticking with a team identity. 

 

Flyers used to have an identity (when they were good) but what are they now? idk. They're sort of in between but not really anything and thus they're close to the playoffs but not really in them.

 

My fear is this will just continue as they will think "we're close" and nothing much will change. 

Buffalo hasn't used young hockey minds. They used young hockey players. The other problem in Buffalo, for the longest of time, was basically cutting their amateur scoring department and relying solely on video. That was done during the Darcy Regier era.

 

As for the Flyers, there's nothing wrong with replacing the senior advisors. They've become stagnant. And yes, young hockey minds are ideal. Why not hire some of the youngest and brightest? They have a completely different perception of what the Flyers need to do. 

 

In terms of identity,  for the longest of time, we were sold on 'Flyers hockey.' I still don't know what Flyers hockey is. For the longest of time, they played a standard two way game, but now, I have no idea. And that hasn't changed under Fletcher. He's continued to add to the confusion.

 

Oh,  someone mentored Phil Myers. It's funny that when he got to Nashville,  the first thing John Hynes noted was that his fundamentals were completely ignored. A basic that should be emphasize at every level and Nashville are having to teach him basic fundamentals. That's an absolute development fail on the Flyers end. And yet, their answer to development is to hire Ian Laperriere as head coach in Lehigh Valley. And let's be honest,  Schmuck dropped the ball there. Are you telling me that there wasn't better coaches available who have a background in player development? Schmuck took the lazy and nepotism way out.

 

Yeah I'm pissed. A fan for 40 years and the club is fundamentally worse off than they've ever been. Honestly, I how they bring a guy like John Stevens back. People may dislike the guy, but players who played for him in the AHL were ready to play when they reached the NHL. The fundamentals and basics were there and they fit in seamlessly. 

 

 

 

 

[Mad Dog]

12 minutes ago, radoran said:

Dude's a -41 for his career. Had two seasons of -20+ while playing for the Flyers.

 You choose to zoom on the negatives, which is your prerogative, of course.  But I want to point out that in 2017-2018, he had 65 points with +10.  Gotta be a fluke... He is not a panacea; at least I didn't think he was.  But I do believe the Flyers gave up on him too early. I think when put in the right (read winning) situation, he could provide some value.

 

18 minutes ago, radoran said:

The idea he might be better with a better pairing partner is true of just about every defenceman who has ever laced up skates.

 Not true at all.  Karl Dykhuis (remember him?) waves his hand.  

[radoran]

6 minutes ago, Mad Dog said:

But I want to point out that in 2017-2018, he had 65 points with +10.  Gotta be a fluke...

 

If the other six years of his career are any indication... possibly... It just happens that that season is sandwiched between his two -20 campaigns, which might just colour the perception a bit.

 

I'm not a "Ghost hater" - and, again, hate the deal that sent him away - but I also don't "miss" him all that much.

[GratefulFlyers]

Gost’s +/- numbers are irrelevant. If you grade that type of player by his defense of course you’ll conclude he’s a liability. No mystery why Fletcher bribed AZ to take him, nor why AV pushed and sent him onto waivers prior to the trade. The Flyers didn’t know what they had after Gost lit up the NHL his rookie year. When he finally go healthy again AV didn’t value him at all, he either didn’t understand how to use him or more likely just didn’t want to use him.

 

Also, someone mentioned he was a “malcontent” or something like that. I never heard anything like that at all. When he went unclaimed everyone I heard only talked about how well he took it, no resentment didn’t complain he just went out and played.

[mojo1917]

42 minutes ago, flyercanuck said:

 

 The Ellis trade is probably the best one Fletcher has made as Flyer GM. The fact that he's played 4 games shows the wizardry we have at the helm. There's also the 5 more years on that contract that odds are, aren't going to work in the Flyers favor.

 His next best deal is Gudas for Niskanen. We got 68 games out of that one. 

 Atkinson for Voracek was fine, though we add a year of contract there as well. 

 The rest of his trades basically resulted in flushing draft picks down the toilet. 

 

 

 

 So if that's the league, how come Fletcher is never on the receiving end of those draft picks and players? Seems he's always giving them away. 

 

 

 I agree. It's funny how he took over the franchise three years ago.

 

 

 Well all I have to judge him on is his near decade in Minnesota where he managed to do...nothing, and his 3 years in Philly where he's managed to take a mediocre young team and turn them into a worse, albeit older team. And he was even spotted a goalie and a top pairing defenceman...something pretty rare in Philly.

That just doesn't scream "Genius" to me. 

 There's a lot of good fans on here that follow the Wild who pretty much to a T warned us when we hired him. They weren't wrong. 

 

Let's be clear I'm not over here saying the guy is a genius.

I am saying he's not a dumbass. There is a wide gap between those two mental states. 

And as rad said, to behave as though he hasn't had some terrible injury luck and as a result has had to make things up as he's gone is disingenuous. 

 

People are angry at the way the season has gone, I am too.

To act as though it is by design because the GM is Kramer making sausages is a great visual but not accurate.