TORT Claim

[Buffalo Rick]

1 hour ago, FireDillabaugh said:

Lol.  Did they really "lose" him though?  Don't think there was anyone out there expecting Buffalo to keep him on their roster.  And they did get the 1st, 2nd and a good player in Tuch for him and the 3rd(whether Krebs pans out or not is still TBD-but he's youth).  It's not really like he was sent packing for nothing.

Oh I know.  And Tuch wants to be here.  A two hour drive on I-90 West from Syracuse where he grew up a Sabres fan.  I like Krebs already.  Can’t wait to see Powers.  Now just get us a goalie.

Now Jack has Cassidy for coach.  Expect him to pay dividends next year

[ruxpin]

2 minutes ago, FireDillabaugh said:

Lol.  Only one of them.  Just Owen Power.

Maybe he just started streaming The Powers of Matthew Star?  Ya never know.

[radoran]

40 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

Because at his last stop he had players like Panarin, Bobrovsky, Dubois and others running for the exits?

 

Um...

 

40 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

I fall to see the argument.

 

 

the organization* feels they are thisclose to competing

 

#Flyers

Edited June 16, 2022 by radoran

[CoachX]

1 hour ago, SCFlyguy said:

Lol, you are so desperate for this to work.

Better than wanting everything to fail just so you can say I told you so

[CoachX]

42 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

Hopefully that answers it, but I have heard no pro argument that isn't pure and utter fantasy, propaganda bull####.

Yep, that answers my question. 

 

We can now see if you are right

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

44 minutes ago, FireDillabaugh said:

Lol.  Only one of them.  Just Owen Power.

 

Ahh, but you underestimate Buffalo cloning technology....

[GrittyForever]

4 hours ago, Hockey Junkie said:

Welcome to my world.  Adams loses Eichel.   Burns my money

More like Adams cleaned house and got rid of Eichel. (and Risto) and Buffalo instantly got better not worse. Locker rooms and players attitudes do matter. There's a lesson or two in that. 

[flyercanuck]

6 hours ago, ruxpin said:

The question is actually "why is he a good hire?"

 

Because he won a Cup 18 years ago? And nothing since?  Even with a world class goalie and a pretty good team?

 

Because at his last stop he had players like Panarin, Bobrovsky, Dubois and others running for the exits?

 

Because under him players like Seth Jones regressed? Badly?

 

Because he won a round against Tampa but very little else?

 

Because he acts like a complete and utter ahole without the balance of any success?

 

 

I fall to see the argument.

 

He will crush any offense. In Philly's case, it's not a huge thing since we don't have any, but any improvement we saw in Sanheim, for example, is about to die a horrible death.   Because it will be Torts archaic idiocy or nothing.  Same goes for Cam York.  

 

This is a front office who is stuck in some exaggeration of the past hiring a coach whose value died in the past.  Great call here.

 

Hopefully that answers it, but I have heard no pro argument that isn't pure and utter fantasy, propaganda bull####.

 

He'll take the outbound Vigneault express in two years.  And unless there is a purge of the front office or divine intervention brings about the sale of the team, we'll all be arguing about the washed up has been du jour.

 

I can't stand Boudreau, either, but I'd prefer it.  

 

 

 Hey, have the Flyers come up with their stupid goofy catchy moto for the year? How about this one...

 

 Why?

 

It could cover everything since they hired Fletcher.

[Buffalo Rick]

9 hours ago, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

 

You are correcto-mundo, my friend.
He most certainly did.

And he was good back then.  Led the Amerks to the Calder Cup I believe.  I know Keenan did.  Long after the days when Don Cherry played here.  Cherry was here for the Sabres/Devils regular season game where the Sabres took a hit for the city of Rochester.  Sold out, about 10,000 seats if you include the stage seats that were put in . I was there.  Broduer and Hasek.  A 2-2 tie.  The only NHL regular season game played in Rochester at an AHL venue.  Loved it.Somewhere I still have the program.  

[SCFlyguy]

9 hours ago, CoachX said:

Better than wanting everything to fail just so you can say I told you so

Nah, it's because that's the only way things will change.  Plus the Flyers are stupid, arrogant people who are easy to root against.

[CoachX]

47 minutes ago, SCFlyguy said:

Nah, it's because that's the only way things will change.  Plus the Flyers are stupid, arrogant people who are easy to root against.

So  you arent a Flyer fan, youre a Flyer hater.

 

it all make sense now

 

[SCFlyguy]

Ooohhh, you going to take my fan card away?   Oh no!

 

I hate this version, that’s for sure.

[CoachX]

Why do you think Tortorella wiil fail, and does he HAVE to deliver a cup for it to be a success?

[Brewin Flames]

13 hours ago, GrittyForever said:

Rumour has him going to Boston. Or at least they are talking. 

 

 

He has had an interview, but it would disgust me if the bruins hired him.

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

19 minutes ago, CoachX said:

Why do you think Tortorella wiil fail, and does he HAVE to deliver a cup for it to be a success?

 

I'm not speaking for the guy you are asking, but from where I sit, and despite some people really not liking Torts as Flyers coach, I believe if he can get that locker room straightened out, guys competing and playing hard (even if its above their paygrade), and has the team become a regular PITA to play against, I think you can call his tenure a success.
Bonus if he can help clear out Chuck Fletcher for you as well.
Double bonus if by some miracle, he somehow manages to have the team pull Stanley Cup out of their collective arses.

There is always the danger, as some have correctly pointed out, of regression, particularly of the younger crop of players. If that happens, one would have to look and see the reason WHY they regressed.

Was Tortorella taking a completely $#i tty approach with them? Not really giving them a chance?
Or was it the young players in question were too thin skinned to handle a loud, overbearing coach like Torts tell them the truth: that they AREN'T getting a participation award, that life in the NHL can be difficult and unfair, and that if they want trust and playtime, they need to work their gonads off?

If it was the latter, then you could probably thank Tortorella because it means the players in question never really had the testicular fortitude to begin with and would have folded like a cheap Colorado cannabis tent under pressure of the game anyways.

 

Plain n simple, Torts is here to fix chit. To pull the Flyers, kicking and screaming, out of the cellar and reshape them from an orange and black NHL doormat, to a team that says "Eff you" to their opponents, and leaves trails of broken players and egos in their wake....even if the wins don't come right away.

Compete level, attitude, and pride...that's what he is there for.
If you notice those things on the Flyers once again in the next season or two, then the man has done his job.
Anything else he can get out of this group, or out of any other incoming players is gravy.
 

[elmatus]

15 minutes ago, CoachX said:

Why do you think Tortorella wiil fail, and does he HAVE to deliver a cup for it to be a success?

 

That's a solid question, and I agree it's one we tend to overlook a lot. Maybe not so much right now, since many of us here at least seem to understand the current team is years away from competing for anything but a bubble spot at best.

 

But you're right. The benchmark for success for Torts can't be winning a cup. That's ridiculous. The team needs far too many things for that to happen in any short term. A coach can't suddenly make players more talented or skilled, and that is easily our biggest need right now.

 

My worry is more so the wasted time I feel this will amount to. That's not necessarily on Torts either though. That's really a front office thing. This seeming refusal to see the actual state of this team is aggravating. The number one thing on my wishlist right now would be for Fletch to come out and state the facts: This team does not have the pieces to compete for a cup. We need to draft and develop some number of elite players, and we're not going to be truly competitive until that happens. Full stop.

 

Now I don't like Torts. I guess it may as well be him? It doesn't really matter though. As long as the brass continue to live in a fantasy land, we're going to be dealing with the same mediocrity at best. Next season is not going to be a great year, regardless of who is coaching. Bring in a healthy Couts and a semi-healthy team behind him, and maybe we can fight for a bubble spot. That doesn't seem like a great step forward to me, but I guess?

 

The problem I think is that I want more out of a team than just hockey. I want to like the people involved. I don't always, but my fondest years as a fan are those where I like certain players or the coach or even the front office. I liked Giroux. I like Couts still. I liked Provo, though his reaction to last season's failures seem childish to me. I thought AV was a solid hire. I liked Hexy at the time, and I was very engaged in his build from the bottom approach. It didn't work of course, but I liked it. I liked it despite the team being mediocre for that whole period in time.

 

I don't like Torts. I've come to dislike Fletch now too, though not really for the same reasons. Torts is a tool. Fletch is just inept despite himself. Maybe that shouldn't matter to me, but it does. It kind of matters more right now actually, where the team itself is bound to not be very good. If at least I liked some of the people involved, that might be a bit of a pick me up, just as it was during the Hexy days. Now I don't even have that to look forward to. 

 

That's a me thing obviously. Everyone's going to have their take, and I'm sure many don't care about any of that as much as I do. That's fine. I can only speak for myself, but that's a big reason why I don't like this hire. A guy like that isn't someone I can bring myself to like, and that matters to me.

[SCFlyguy]

55 minutes ago, CoachX said:

Why do you think Tortorella wiil fail, and does he HAVE to deliver a cup for it to be a success?

Not sure if this is directed to me, but here goes:

 

Let me define success, first.  For me, success is a team that is built for making multiple playoff runs over several years.  A team that is a given to make the playoffs and that actually wins a round or two, with an ECF and a SC appearance in the run.  They don’t have to win the Cup for success (in fact we know they probably won’t because only one team does).  Success is not making the playoffs once in a while, winning a round every ten years, and never really being a true threat to the good teams.

 

Torts will “fail” because this team is woefully devoid of talent, but management can’t admit it and doesn’t have a plan to change it.

 

He might make them marginally better, he could get them to the playoffs once before he is fired, but they won’t ever be a threat to win anything and it’s going to look like the last ten years.

[Howie58]

17 hours ago, vis said:

Ha!  
 

Guess he can’t be blamed if things go south with Torts.  Wonder what this means for Fletcher, though.  Seems he is being a bit undermined here.

 

 

 

This was discussed in the last "Top Shelf Hockey" episode on YouTube.  There is talk that Briere is being groomed. 

[Math]

18 hours ago, vis said:

22 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

I wanted Jim Montgomery.

He had a good run and this team in the past has been good to people recovering from addictions.  I don’t know enough about his coaching acumen, but Tortorella does have a longer track record.  I also wonder if Comcast wanted no parts of him because of his history.

 

Globally he was ok during his tenure with the Stars in a very defensive-minded team. He started with a 1-7-1 record on the 2019-2020 campaign and said that he identified the causes and would fix things. Well he was right, going like 19-3-2 in the next games en route for a play-off berth. Then Bowness took over and it was not the same pace.

 

Getting drunk on one of the owner's bar was clealy not a good idea though.

[Math]

16 hours ago, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

Pretty fair assessment of Chuck Fletcher.

In Minnesota, he was viewed in much the same way. Always with the "safe" (or seemingly safe) picks and signings....and yes, some of his signings had Wild fans scratching their heads.

Definitely not the type of guy to take big chances, tries to stay withing the status quo....and if that status quo is "alright" (like it was in Minnesota), then his teams fall squarely into the "good but not good enough" territory.....but if the status quo is awful, like it currently is in Philadelphia, he is exposed even more and the team ends up a complete trainwreck.

 

Yeah quite honestly he did a few good transactions, numerous bad ones, and some that were absolutely awful. From an outer perspective, I'm wondering if getting rid of Fletcher would not be the first thing to do to start fresh, rather than picking the right coach. Just wondering...

[CoachX]

1 hour ago, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

 

I'm not speaking for the guy you are asking, but from where I sit, and despite some people really not liking Torts as Flyers coach, I believe if he can get that locker room straightened out, guys competing and playing hard (even if its above their paygrade), and has the team become a regular PITA to play against, I think you can call his tenure a success.
Bonus if he can help clear out Chuck Fletcher for you as well.
Double bonus if by some miracle, he somehow manages to have the team pull Stanley Cup out of their collective arses.

There is always the danger, as some have correctly pointed out, of regression, particularly of the younger crop of players. If that happens, one would have to look and see the reason WHY they regressed.

Was Tortorella taking a completely $#i tty approach with them? Not really giving them a chance?
Or was it the young players in question were too thin skinned to handle a loud, overbearing coach like Torts tell them the truth: that they AREN'T getting a participation award, that life in the NHL can be difficult and unfair, and that if they want trust and playtime, they need to work their gonads off?

If it was the latter, then you could probably thank Tortorella because it means the players in question never really had the testicular fortitude to begin with and would have folded like a cheap Colorado cannabis tent under pressure of the game anyways.

 

Plain n simple, Torts is here to fix chit. To pull the Flyers, kicking and screaming, out of the cellar and reshape them from an orange and black NHL doormat, to a team that says "Eff you" to their opponents, and leaves trails of broken players and egos in their wake....even if the wins don't come right away.

Compete level, attitude, and pride...that's what he is there for.
If you notice those things on the Flyers once again in the next season or two, then the man has done his job.
Anything else he can get out of this group, or out of any other incoming players is gravy.
 

Great post. Thanks

[ruxpin]

1 hour ago, CoachX said:

Why do you think Tortorella wiil fail, and does he HAVE to deliver a cup for it to be a success?

 

The "deliver a cup" for success is a very valid question.   For me, no.   I think that would be an extremely unfair criteria given the condition of the team.  It's like giving the doctor 2 hours to get the coma patient into the 2-week away Olympic triathalon trials.

 

If he were to get them to solid playoff contenders (not, we only have to have X-team lose 5 out of their last 6 and win all our games and hope the 3 teams in between also lose...) and have them playing in a sober, if not cohesive way, then we're at least in the right direction.   He'd deserve his face on a postage stamp if he gets that.

 

1 hour ago, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

There is always the danger, as some have correctly pointed out, of regression, particularly of the younger crop of players. If that happens, one would have to look and see the reason WHY they regressed.

Was Tortorella taking a completely $#i tty approach with them? Not really giving them a chance?
Or was it the young players in question were too thin skinned to handle a loud, overbearing coach like Torts tell them the truth: that they AREN'T getting a participation award, that life in the NHL can be difficult and unfair, and that if they want trust and playtime, they need to work their gonads off?

 

The younger players concenrn me with him.   But it's only partially about not giving them the chance.  And not really at all about the overbearing thing, but that's also not necessary.   You alter your approach for the audience, but that's aside from my issue.   My issue is taking players with a certain natural skillset -- the very reason they were drafted and who improve in multi-facets of the game when they're permitted to utilize those strengths -- and forcing them into a role and game that does not feed those strengths, tamps them down, makes them struggle at all facets, and then berate them or reduce them to nothing.   Vigneault did some of that with Sanheim, for example, and others.   And I really think there were examples of this with Torts in Columbus.  On the otherhand, in Columbus Torts took a completely irrelevant team and got them competitive, so that's a plus in his column.  

 

I'm pretty sure I might be able to take his coaching tenure if I'm careful to never watch a press conference or media scrum.   Because I vicerally cannot stand the guy.

[SCFlyguy]

Fighting with the press shows a certain immaturity because it is a fight you can’t win.  It only makes your job harder.  That doesn’t mean you have to be buddies or give them exactly what they want.  Just be honest, open, and have some personality.  Winning helps.

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

10 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

The younger players concenrn me with him.   But it's only partially about not giving them the chance.  And not really at all about the overbearing thing, but that's also not necessary.   You alter your approach for the audience, but that's aside from my issue.   My issue is taking players with a certain natural skillset -- the very reason they were drafted and who improve in multi-facets of the game when they're permitted to utilize those strengths -- and forcing them into a role and game that does not feed those strengths, tamps them down, makes them struggle at all facets, and then berate them or reduce them to nothing.   Vigneault did some of that with Sanheim, for example, and others.   And I really think there were examples of this with Torts in Columbus.  On the otherhand, in Columbus Torts took a completely irrelevant team and got them competitive, so that's a plus in his column.  

 

I'm pretty sure I might be able to take his coaching tenure if I'm careful to never watch a press conference or media scrum.   Because I vicerally cannot stand the guy.

 

Valid points.

You have been one of the people that, for as long as I've known you here, never did like Torts.....like, anywhere, so you staying consistent with that is no surprise.

Perhaps best case scenario for you then would be he doesn't muck up or dull the skillsets of young players, while instilling a no nonsense approach to the game...perhaps that way you may be able to at least tolerate him there  

[fan4ever]

2 hours ago, CoachX said:

Why do you think Tortorella wiil fail, and does he HAVE to deliver a cup for it to be a success?

 

I'd take a winning season right now