Trade Talk Bobrovsky Trade Talk

[terp]

i want the team to go into march with the idea that a particular guy is begining to tune his game for the post season, not with the flyers' usual "we're not sure who is going to go come april, we'll use the last 10 games to decide."

I think this is that part everyone agrees on, so the question becomes: "How do we get there?" You get no argument from me that goaltenders typically have a different mentality and I imagine different coaches have different styles and different degrees of success in dealing with them. It may be too early to say but Lavy does not seem to subscribe to the idea that the starter gets to start 60-65 games even if he underperforms. He seems more inclined to go with who he thinks is playing better but with a measure of redemption available for those who are struggling. As you know, I agree with this approach. I especially agree with it because I don't give a rat's ass about Bryzgalov's contract and think Bob is likely to emerge as the better player very soon. I personally don't see this as creating a circus so much as letting the chips fall where they may or letting the cream rise to the top or may the best man win or what have you. It may not be healthy for Bryzgalov but I think it is healthy for the team.

[aziz]

It may be too early to say but Lavy does not seem to subscribe to the idea that the starter gets to start 60-65 games even if he underperforms.

that does look like his approach at the moment. which is weird, because he has always rode his primary horse hard through thick and thin on previous teams. it is starting to look like maybe laviolette was never on board with the bryzgalov signing, and is taking the opportunity to turn back to his prefered goalie. which is my prefered goalie, too, so all good....except that bryzgalov is going to be around for a LONG time.

I especially agree with it because I don't give a rat's ass about Bryzgalov's contract and think Bob is likely to emerge as the better player very soon. I personally don't see this as creating a circus so much as letting the chips fall where they may or letting the cream rise to the top or may the best man win or what have you. It may not be healthy for Bryzgalov but I think it is healthy for the team.

that makes sense and i don't completely disagree. i just can't get past the fact the team has surrendered almost 10% of its cap space for apparently no reason at all. i'd like there to be *some* kind of upside to that. i have a hard time seeing management allowing bryzgalov to become the #2 permanently.

[aziz]

Another important thing to remember: Laviolette doesn't have a nine-year, NMC deal and Snider has shown that he's got no problem canning coaches.

that's a good point, rad. i guess the question is how involved in the depthchart desicions snider and holmgren want to be on it. i wonder to what extent they would go to protect their investment/save face on the whole debacle. might they trade bob specifically to take him out of the picture?

[radoran]

that's a good point, rad. i guess the question is how involved in the depthchart desicions snider and holmgren want to be on it. i wonder to what extent they would go to protect their investment/save face on the whole debacle. might they trade bob specifically to take him out of the picture?

Snider got invovled with the depth chart decisions by grabbing the chart marked GOALIE and telling Homer to put "BRYZGALOV" at the top of it.

Snider was apparently very specific that he wanted the "goalie carousel" to end and the nine-year, NMC deal to Bryz was the move he apparently wanted.

Bryzgalov is the Flyers' #1 goalie. The only thing that would change that is injury - unless Bryzgalov turns into the second coming of Trevor "Beach Ball" Kidd. The only place this is going to be debated is on fan forums.

The only reason to trade Bob (now/this season) is if you get the right deal for him.

[aziz]

Bryzgalov is the Flyers' #1 goalie. The only thing that would change that is injury - unless Bryzgalov turns into the second coming of Trevor "Beach Ball" Kidd. The only place this is going to be debated is on fan forums.

and yet bob has started 3 of the last 5. i dunno. i'm thinking there is some debating going on within management, too.

AND TREVOR KIDD HAD GREAT PADS!!!

[radoran]

and yet bob has started 3 of the last 5. i dunno. i'm thinking there is some debating going on within management, too.

If they're having buyer's remorse before the end of the first NOVEMBER of a NINE YEAR, NMC CONTRACT, then we're all pretty much screwed...

There were other options available out there both for this year and into next.

The time to debate Bryzgalov (for management) was the end of June, not the end of November.

[aziz]

If they're having buyer's remorse before the end of the first NOVEMBER of a NINE YEAR, NMC CONTRACT, then we're all pretty much screwed...

+1

[Spinorama]

No one including Comcast will care if Bob not Bryz is winning. Wins = revenue.

amen to that

[terp]

which is weird, because he has always rode his primary horse hard through thick and thin on previous teams.

True though his most relevant body of work was when he had Cam Ward between the pipes. He's a very good player and NOT a head case.

it is starting to look like maybe laviolette was never on board with the bryzgalov signing, and is taking the opportunity to turn back to his prefered goalie.

This had not occurred to me but it seems plausible based upon what little we have seen so far. Good one. Also, the comment Bob made over the summer about the "players playing the game, not the contracts" sure sounds to me like something Lavy would say. Lavy seems like the type who might not give a damn about a big contract. I'm imagining the conversation between him and Homer in my mind's eye: We're paying him a lot of money you know. Yeah but he's playing lousy..democracy...competition...Bob's earning the starts...

[DaGreatGazoo]

Is anyone else starting to wonder about Lavy's goaltending management?? I am still in the camp that last year's cluster f*uck in the playoffs was primarily his fault. Granted Boosh or Bob didn't step up in net, but no one will EVER convince me it was a smart move to put Leighton in net..and I thought that before he laid that monster egg.

This year's questionable rotation is starting to take on a similar feel..albiet an extended one since there is plenty of season left.

[radoran]

True though his most relevant body of work was when he had Cam Ward between the pipes. He's a very good player and NOT a head case.

All goalies are head cases.

Bryzgalov actually has a better career GAA (2.55 to 2.76) and SV% (.915 to .909) and trails Ward by .006 in win pct (.509 to .515 - based on strict WINS and counting OTLs as Ls).

He's been a 65-70 game starter for each of the past three years. Ward's been in the same boat, aside from his injured year, and topped out at 74 last season (probably why they looked for a reliable backup in Boosh to take some time off Ward's clock).

Ward's playoff pedigree aside - which is a Big Aside, I'll grant you - they are not dissimilar goalies.

This had not occurred to me but it seems plausible based upon what little we have seen so far. Good one. Also, the comment Bob made over the summer about the "players playing the game, not the contracts" sure sounds to me like something Lavy would say. Lavy seems like the type who might not give a damn about a big contract. I'm imagining the conversation between him and Homer in my mind's eye: We're paying him a lot of money you know. Yeah but he's playing lousy..democracy...competition...Bob's earning the starts...

I think "playing the hot hand" isn't a bad way to go for some goalie combos, especially in November.

Come April, it's going to be Bryz that gets the shot (barring injury).

I gotta agree with aziz on the goalie mindset - you don't restore your #1's confidence by hanging him out to dry.

Ward's been yanked twice this year - once in Philly. Bryz has been yanked (as a starter) once.

Here's Bryz's starts in November:

GAA: 2, 2, 1.92, 2, 1, 4.13, 9*

SV%: .935, .943, .917, .939, .968, .871, .667*

* pulled

And Bob's November starts:

GAA: 2.77, 3.01, 5.12, 1, 2.05

SV%: .923, .850, .872, .958, .938

It's not like Bob's been OBVIOUSLY outplaying Bryzgalov on a consistent basis.

Their next four games are a pair of B2Bs - I'd imagine we see each play a game in those. Then I'll wager Bryz starts at least 6 of the next 9.

[radoran]

Is anyone else starting to wonder about Lavy's goaltending management?? I am still in the camp that last year's cluster f*uck in the playoffs was primarily his fault. Granted Boosh or Bob didn't step up in net, but no one will EVER convince me it was a smart move to put Leighton in net..and I thought that before he laid that monster egg.

Yes.

I thought the goalie carousel was ridiculous. Leighton shouldn't have been in the same zip code as the Flyers' crease.

Bob comes in, loses a 1-0 Game 1 and starts off behind a shaky team in Game 2 and then gets demoted to THIRD and doesn't get another start for three weeks?

1-0 losses are NEVER "the goalie's fault" and there's NO way that one shaky start should lose the starting job to a journeyman backup and a waiver wire acquisition.

[terp]

Ward's playoff pedigree aside - which is a Big Aside, I'll grant you - they are not dissimilar goalies.

On one hand there is what I think they team should do and on the other how I suspect Lavy will handle the goaltending. So starting with my own, personal perspective, there is most certainly some question about Bryzgalov's ability to handle pressure. By that I mean he's unproven. So it seems to me that one would want to find out over the course of the season whether or not he's going to handle pressure. Thus far, Bryzgalov isn't doing anything to make a believer out of me. IMO, he hasn't played well at all. I see him as fighting the puck and disagree with some of the hockey press who say that he was "excellent" for a 5 game spell. For the most part, he's not made timely saves, something that Cam Ward does and that doesn't show up on the stat sheet. I think Bryzgalov was decent and had the wind at his back for a 5 game spell. One school of thought has it that you continue to start Bryzgalov at the same rate (60-65 games) even when he is going through a bad stretch. I'm not a fan of that approach. If I'm going to rely on a guy in pressure situations in the playoffs, I should also be able to rely on him to sort out his game if he's in a slump as well as to deal with being pushed by a talented back up. If he can't deal with those two things while playing in Philly, he's not going to be of much use in the playoffs. This is strictly my opinion and I'm fully that there are other legitimate points of view.

Come April, it's going to be Bryz that gets the shot (barring injury).

I think Lavy is going to go with the goaltender who he thinks gives the team the best shot at winning and I don't think he has decided at this point who that is going to be. Bryzgalov has been lousy for the most part and I think that has opened the door a crack for Bob in Lavy's mind. I would say that Bryzgalov is still the favorite to be the starter in April-whatever, but I very much doubt that Bryzgalov will have it handed to him. He's going to have to earn it in a bit more of a competition than it would otherwise have been had he not gotten off to such a lousy start. I like what I perceive as Lavy's approach.

[aziz]

I think Lavy is going to go with the goaltender who he thinks gives the team the best shot at winning and I don't think he has decided at this point who that is going to be.

i can't disagree with that in general....my concern is what kind of time frame laviolette is going to use to determine. if he continues on his week by week or game by game thing, there is going to be a problem. imo, he has to make his call soon, and ride that the rest of the way, barring complete meltdown or injury. the goalie that is choosen will still have rough patches, but can best get through them if he is given the icetime to work the issues out. if laviolette re-evaluates after every bad game or bad streak.....again, that's how michael leighton ended up appearing the playoffs. that's a bad approach.

and to reiterate rad's point, this is assuming that laviolette actually has liberty of making a real choice....which is not something i'm convinced of.

[radoran]

I think Lavy is going to go with the goaltender who he thinks gives the team the best shot at winning and I don't think he has decided at this point who that is going to be.

As long as the "goaltender who he thinks gives the team the best shot at winning" gets more than 3.5 periods to prove it, I'm good with that.

I guess I'm just not convinced that Lavi has a good eye for goaltending. It was a no-brainer to play Ward after his Conn Smythe win (and Lavi never made the playoffs with Carolina after that). It was a no-brainer to play Osgood on the Island over a young DiPietro.

Those being Lavi's two previous gigs - and after last year's goalie disaster in the playoffs and the previous year's decision to go with Leighton in the Finals - what evidence is there to rely on Laviolette to handle the current goalie situation well?

I will speculate that if he goes Bob over Bryz and doesn't win the Cup, he's fired before the playoffs are over.

[Claude Monet]

*******Trade Bob? If you get the right offer, you trade anybody. *******

this is a monster catch-22. considering the situation with Bryz's contract, other teams know they have leverage on Homer in regard to acquiring Bob. For a team to make a solid offer for Bob would mean that he is playing really well and handling the workload that Brzy could not.

[terp]

@radoran

@aziz

I think we're getting into an interesting area here: Lavy's role. He's got a lot of goaltending talent on the roster and he handle it correctly or it may be his job on the line.

It is a tricky situation, especially if Lavy was on record as not wanting to sign Bryzgalov. If so and he obviously mishandles Bryzgalov, it looks like he is trying to show up his boss. We all know how that goes. Also, I think there is a real incentive to start Bryzgalov come April because if he starts Bob and they don't win, he's failing in the process of perhaps appearing to show up his boss. So it will be a safer career move to start Bryzgalov. If Bryz fails, Lavy can tell Homer: "Don't look at me. Fire Snider if you don't like it." This sets up a situation where Bob has to play so well that Lavy has no choice but to start him. He doesn't have to merely play better than Bryz, he has to be obviously better and truly outstanding to get the nod.

[radoran]

I think we're getting into an interesting area here: Lavy's role. He's got a lot of goaltending talent on the roster and he handle it correctly or it may be his job on the line.

It is a tricky situation, especially if Lavy was on record as not wanting to sign Bryzgalov. If so and he obviously mishandles Bryzgalov, it looks like he is trying to show up his boss. We all know how that goes. Also, I think there is a real incentive to start Bryzgalov come April because if he starts Bob and they don't win, he's failing in the process of perhaps appearing to show up his boss. So it will be a safer career move to start Bryzgalov. If Bryz fails, Lavy can tell Homer: "Don't look at me. Fire Snider if you don't like it." This sets up a situation where Bob has to play so well that Lavy has no choice but to start him. He doesn't have to merely play better than Bryz, he has to be obviously better and truly outstanding to get the nod.

This is pretty much why I see Bryz as the obvious playoff starter for the Flyers (assuming they make the playoffs...). I don't think Bob can get enough starts to "earn" the job and I don't think that Laviolette's job is safe short of another Finals run (and probably a Cup - Terry Murray is on Line 2, apparently he wants to say "hello" or something).

Remember the old axiom: Even year - blame the coach; Odd year - blame the goalie.

[doom88]

Yes.

I thought the goalie carousel was ridiculous. Leighton shouldn't have been in the same zip code as the Flyers' crease.

Bob comes in, loses a 1-0 Game 1 and starts off behind a shaky team in Game 2 and then gets demoted to THIRD and doesn't get another start for three weeks?

1-0 losses are NEVER "the goalie's fault" and there's NO way that one shaky start should lose the starting job to a journeyman backup and a waiver wire acquisition.

I think that was Homer's call bluntly. If Bob played an extra game (which he eventually did), he would lose his waiver exemption.

[radoran]

I think that was Homer's call bluntly. If Bob played an extra game (which he eventually did), he would lose his waiver exemption.

Which only plays up the question of Lavi being able to make a real decision about "the best goaltender who he thinks gives the best shot at winning."

If we recall, Martin Gerber was his original choice the year Ward won his Conn Smythe...

[Vanflyer]

have you worked in corporate america? when snider is called before the board of directors next summer and he is asked, "so, we made a $51mil investment last year, how is that working out? are we getting a good ROI on it?" and he answers, "well, not really. i mean, by the end of th season he was only playing games now and then, we have this other guy who is way way cheaper and seems to be much better, so...we're kinda just sitting on that $51mil guy, he isn't doing much for us," how do you think the suits are going to react? you think it'll be, "oh, that's cool, no big"? or do you think it'll be, "what the f**k are you talking about?? you told us so long as we spent this money we were set. you told us we had to do this, and now you're saying we could just as well set that $51mil on fire and been in the same situation??" keep in mind these are not normal people. they are people who pay someone to read their email to them aloud and can't be bothered to even record their own voicemail greetings. what you are saying makes sense, but the people ed snider answers to do not specialize in making sense. they specialize in obsessing about money, and will obsess about the money the flyers wasted on bryzgalov. the fact the fl;yers are winning with bob will only highlight the poor poor recommendation ed snider made to them about bryzgalov.

Edited November 30, 2011 by Vanflyer

[Vanflyer]

have you worked in corporate america? when snider is called before the board of directors next summer and he is asked, "so, we made a $51mil investment last year, how is that working out? are we getting a good ROI on it?" and he answers, "well, not really. i mean, by the end of th season he was only playing games now and then, we have this other guy who is way way cheaper and seems to be much better, so...we're kinda just sitting on that $51mil guy, he isn't doing much for us," how do you think the suits are going to react? you think it'll be, "oh, that's cool, no big"? or do you think it'll be, "what the f**k are you talking about?? you told us so long as we spent this money we were set. you told us we had to do this, and now you're saying we could just as well set that $51mil on fire and been in the same situation??" keep in mind these are not normal people. they are people who pay someone to read their email to them aloud and can't be bothered to even record their own voicemail greetings. what you are saying makes sense, but the people ed snider answers to do not specialize in making sense. they specialize in obsessing about money, and will obsess about the money the flyers wasted on bryzgalov. the fact the fl;yers are winning with bob will only highlight the poor poor recommendation ed snider made to them about bryzgalov.

C'mon Aziz, being a bit extreme on this aren't you? A board of directors rarely gets into details like you are referring to unless there is just cause. Just cause usually has to do with $ (or lack thereof). In this case, Ed Snider is the Chairman of the Board for Comcast-Spectacor. Everyone knows he has cart blanch in regards to the operation of the Flyers (his baby). BOD meetings generally cover critical / strategic business decisions. While player expense is certainly a topic, I doubt they get into, "why are we paying this guy 5.6 M and he is not playing" conversation. They would discuss the total expense of all players versus revenue and valuation.

For example, in 2008 the Flyers had a HIGHER 66m) salary than they have this year. That year their revenue was 102m. The other key indicator is valuation. In 2008, the Flyers had their biggest jump in valuation in the last 10 years of nearly 13% (from 244m to 275m). There is another indicator that a board will look at to see how they are operating against other teams in the league: Wins to player cost ratio. Compares the number of wins per player payroll relative to the rest of the NHL. Postseason wins count twice as much as regular season wins. A score of 120 means that the team achieved 20% more victories per dollar of payroll compared with the league average. In 2008 the Flyers had a score of 98.

Flash forward to 2010:

Player Salary: 63m

Revenue: 121m

Valuation: 10%+ (from 273m to 301m)

Wins to Player Cost Ratio: 120

So if the Flyers continue to progressively put up positive numbers like these, I doubt the board bats an eye at a $5.66m per annum contract for the goalie.

What is unclear to me is what happens to players that are on one way (NHL level salaries) that get buried in the AHL. Comcast-Spectacor no longer own the Phantoms. It is unclear to me how that works. Do they pay the salaries or is the Pittsburgh group that owns the Phantoms on the line for Players salaries? If its the Flyers, and take a Michael Leighton for example and I am on the BOD, I would be asking questions about that.

[aziz]

@van

yeah, i was being a bit extreme. i just have a hard time believing the organization will be ok making zero use of the large investment in bryzgalov. i mean, if laviolette goes with bob and it works out, the team is spending $5mil-ish more than they have to for the on-ice product. no one is going to second guess that? i dunno, maybe not. bringing bryzgalov in looks like snider's deciscion, and assuming he can bear looking dumb and there is no one to hold him accountable for the mistake...

as for NHL contracts in the AHL, the NHL team pays. even the AHL portion of a 2-way contract is carried by the parent club. the player signed the contract with that parent club, after all, not the farm team.

[Vanflyer]

@aziz-

Yeah, I get you that they would look pretty silly to be paying 5.6m to ride the bench. Then again, there is Dipietro and now Luongo, so if he does end up sitting, he won't be the only high priced goalie on the bench. Still doesn't make it right.

Re: the NHL contracts, I thought it was the NHL clubs responsibility. So, in the instance of the Phantoms, the group from Pittsburgh that owns the Phantoms is responsible for facilities, parking, merchandising. There has to be something with the gate, because the gate usually pays for the players salary. Not sure how that would work with NHL / AHL arrangements. Any thoughts?

[aziz]

not sure. something could be in the affiliation agreement between the two to cover some part of the salaries. then again, the farm doesn't have the ability to say no to a transfer, at least not that i know of, so i can't see them being stuck covering a percentage of a big multi-million dollar salary for a cap dodge burried in the minors.

also, keep in mind that the phantoms do have guys on ahl-only contracts, they do have their own salary commitments.