whom had enough of watching these Flyers?

[CoachX]

1 minute ago, radoran said:

 

I am on board with your general theory, but Errson was 2.98/.893 in the AHL last season; 2.72/.910 this year.

 

He has four NHL games, two of which came against two of the legit worst teams in the league.

 

Can we maybe just hold off a bit before he is a legit #1, much less a Vezina finalist?

Absolutely! that's why my entire argument is theoretical. I don't know if Errson is good enough or not. That's why I was asking the opinions of my trusty neighborhood forum scholars

[Lindbergh31]

1 hour ago, CoachX said:

To be clear, I don't want to trade him, and it isn't that I don't like him.

 

The Flyers are horrible. They need to rebuild. To do that, they need assets in the system (draft picks), prospects who will develop into good NHL players, and some top end talent. They cannot get that through free agency. Decades of trying (I laugh when I type this) have proven it. So how do you get these things they need?

 

Well, the only real position of strength they have is in goal. They have nothing else. Oh maybe Farabee or TK, possibly Provy, can bring you a return, but not a significant one. Then of course, you have to replace the guy you move. However, if Errson is a legit number 1, and Hart is a stellar number 1, the drop off is not as drastic. And Hart is the one asset that might be able to bring you multiple impact pieces...i repeat, MULTIPLE. As suggest by the article I read, he could fetch two first round picks. For this franchise, that's gold.

 

That's why you do it

I don't remember but Patrick Roy didn't get 2 first round draft picks when he got traded back in the 90's. As for trading Hart, the team that would trade for him would be a contender so those picks would be late first round picks which really wouldn't help the Flyers rebuild. They always say you build a team from the goalie outwards so the Flyers have a goalie to build around, now it's putting the pieces in front of him. Unfortunately, Fletcher isn't the man you want building that team.

[mojo1917]

1 hour ago, radoran said:

 

I am on board with your general theory, but Errson was 2.98/.893 in the AHL last season; 2.72/.910 this year.

 

He has four NHL games, two of which came against two of the legit worst teams in the league.

 

Can we maybe just hold off a bit before he is a legit #1, much less a Vezina finalist?

 

 

Projecting what's been read and seen to answer a question is part of the fun of participating here.

No one was giving the Hart trophy to either young back-up goaltender.

The question was could either backup be a true #1.

Of the two, I think Ersson has a better chance.

When thinking about this hockey club getting ahead of ourselves, helps me to deal with the bleakness of the now. YMMV

 

 

[flyer4ever]

1 hour ago, CoachX said:

Absolutely! that's why my entire argument is theoretical. I don't know if Errson is good enough or not. That's why I was asking the opinions of my trusty neighborhood forum scholars

Is there a 34 year old goalie on IR somewhere that the chucktard can acquire for a 2nd and a 3rd, and then extend for 5 years with a NMC? Only then would I trade Hart. Because anything can happen if you win 3 games in a row.

[radoran]

12 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

The question was could either backup be a true #1.

Of the two, I think Ersson has a better chance.

 

Yeah, and I get that - but also, those aren't the only two options. The two "birds in hand" are what they are. But there are more goalies in the bush, as it were.

 

If they are moving on from Hart (I can see the reasoning, although I'm not rushing to the exit) then they will need another option in goal. If those options are entirely limited to Ersson and Sandersonstrom then I'm keeping Hart.

 

Hey - they're still paying Bryzgalov!

 

[GratefulFlyers]

Hart will never fetch 2 1R picks no way no how but he might fetch 2 2Rers. Fletcher and the Flyers are just stupid enough to make a deal like that. 

 

[radoran]

2 minutes ago, GratefulFlyers said:

Fletcher and the Flyers are just stupid enough to make a deal like that. 

 

They need something to flip for a career -177 defenceman to "improve" the defence.

 

[aziz]

2 hours ago, CoachX said:

However, if Errson is a legit number 1, and Hart is a stellar number 1, the drop off is not as drastic. 

 

as mentioned, Errson was a mid-round draft pick that has been decent but not noteworthy in the A.  4 good games in the NHL, sure, but Brian Boucher had a 5 game shut out streak.

 

Goalies are weird.  It is almost impossible to project their performance forward through time, even if they are well established.  Serge Bobrovsky has two Vezina trophies, but posted less than a .910 S% 5 of the 13 seasons he's played.  Is he really good?  Is he really terrible?  Or, is he just all over the place, and there's no way to know what he'll be like next week, much less next season?

 

I impossible to actually plan for goalies, and a bad idea to even try.  And I say this as someone that plays (well, played) the position.  If there is a guy on your roster getting the job done, don't mess with it.  You can't replace that with anything resembling confidence, you would just have to hope someone else works out.

 

2 hours ago, CoachX said:

And Hart is the one asset that might be able to bring you multiple impact pieces...i repeat, MULTIPLE. As suggest by the article I read, he could fetch two first round picks. For this franchise, that's gold.

 

No, it isn't gold.  It is a chance for gold.  That is really important:  all draft picks are *chances* at quality players.  Even with extreme high end players like Bedard, it's entirely possible he blows his knee out in his first training camp, and that's the end of that.  In that specific case, maybe you take the risk, but the point is:  teams should be *very* careful of trading known quantities for chances.  If you have a useful player on your team, think very hard about getting rid of him to *maybe* bring in another useful player.

[RonJeremy]

13 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

Yeah, and I get that - but also, those aren't the only two options. The two "birds in hand" are what they are. But there are more goalies in the bush, as it were.

 

If they are moving on from Hart (I can see the reasoning, although I'm not rushing to the exit) then they will need another option in goal. If those options are entirely limited to Ersson and Sandersonstrom then I'm keeping Hart.

 

Hey - they're still paying Bryzgalov!

 

If Hart were to be traded it would not be this year. We would need to see Ersson the rest of the way this year and half of next year. If he looks like the second coming of Henrik Lundquist then you see what's available for Hart. I would never trade him  just for draft picks,  it would have to be the other teams top NHL ready player and more... if Ersson is looking great then you can expedite the rebuild by hitting a homerun in this years draft and getting a substantial player and more for Hart.

[radoran]

4 minutes ago, RonJeremy said:

if Ersson is looking great

 

Right, but I don't put this all on "if Ersson.."
 

"Ersson" doesn't specifically matter. If INSERT GOALIE OPTION X HERE arises then you consider it. Doesn't matter if it's Ersson or Buffalo sends you Lukkonen as a makeup for the Ristolainen debacle ()

 

Speaking of which, "Ersson" might have a pretty good opportunity to see what he's got next Monday in Buffalo...

[RonJeremy]

2 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

Right, but I don't put this all on "if Ersson.."
 

"Ersson" doesn't specifically matter. If INSERT GOALIE OPTION X HERE arises then you consider it. Doesn't matter if it's Ersson or Buffalo sends you Lukkonen as a makeup for the Ristolainen debacle ()

 

Speaking of which, "Ersson" might have a pretty good opportunity to see what he's got next Monday in Buffalo...

Give us your scouting report after the game. At least we know Shmuck is not gonna be GM much longer, so he won't be here to F up any more trades. Just by the law of averages  the next guy has to be better.

 

We had a great coach in Laviolette,.then it was Berube, Hakstol and Vigneault, all three failed for various reasons, now we finally have a coach that's making progress . Let's hope we get the same results with our new GM.

 

 

 

[radoran]

12 minutes ago, RonJeremy said:

We had a great coach in Laviolette,.then it was Berube, Hakstol and Vigneault, all three failed for various reasons

 

Laviolette still hasn't won another Cup. Liked him, sure.

 

Berube - won a Cup since he left.

 

Hackstol - has Seattle in a playoff spot.

 

Vigneault - only coach that got the Don Girouxte Team to the Second Round

 

I'm thinking it just maybe wasn't "the coaches".

[RonJeremy]

8 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

Laviolette still hasn't won another Cup. Liked him, sure.

 

Berube - won a Cup since he left.

 

Hackstol - has Seattle in a playoff spot.

 

Vigneault - only coach that got the Don Girouxte Team to the Second Round

 

I'm thinking it just maybe wasn't "the coaches".

I'm not saying any of them had much to work with in Philly and poor drafting and injuries didn't help those coaches. It just seems that under Torts the guys are showing more determination and a few guys have really improved. As much as I hate Shmuck, his draft picks seem to be pretty good. Some of his late picks look good too.If it weren't for his horrible trades and FA signings I don't think he would be so hated. No matter what he has to go and all we can do is hope Briere does not do anything stupid.

[flyercanuck]

30 minutes ago, RonJeremy said:

. As much as I hate Shmuck, his draft picks seem to be pretty good. Some of his late picks look good too.If it weren't for his horrible trades and FA signings I don't think he would be so hated. No matter what he has to go and all we can do is hope Briere does not do anything stupid.

 

His draft picks have 25 total career NHL points. In 4 drafts. His "late' picks (after the 2nd round?) have produced 4 NHL points, total. I get it's still early, and when compared to everything else he's done, well his draft picks haven't handcuffed the teams cap for years, they haven't totally sucked on the Flyers, they aren't injured........all the time....well most of them. His top pick 2 drafts ago came over to play in the A, and quickly begged to go home with his tail between his legs. 

 

 His draft picks don't look terrible, but at this point I have a hard time saying they're pretty good. Time will tell obviously.

[RonJeremy]

On 1/5/2023 at 4:01 PM, flyercanuck said:

 

His draft picks have 25 total career NHL points. In 4 drafts. His "late' picks (after the 2nd round?) have produced 4 NHL points, total. I get it's still early, and when compared to everything else he's done, well his draft picks haven't handcuffed the teams cap for years, they haven't totally sucked on the Flyers, they aren't injured........all the time....well most of them. His top pick 2 drafts ago came over to play in the A, and quickly begged to go home with his tail between his legs. 

 

 His draft picks don't look terrible, but at this point I have a hard time saying they're pretty good. Time will tell obviously.

Nobody expects fourth round guys to put up any points a few years after being drafted . It’s a small sampling but, Attard , who is a late pick, looked more than good in his NHL games . He is also having a solid rookie  season in the AHL and is probably the best dman on the Phantoms.  Desoyner,  who is another late pick is the leading goal scorer for the Phantoms in his rookie year. When was the last time a couple of late Flyer picks were two of the best players in their rookie year even in the AHL . Foerester is also playing well and York is really coming on for the Flyers. I also think that Gauthier is the most advanced prospect at his age that we have had in ages. 
 

Don’t get me wrong, I hate Shmuck but I think his top draft picks like York, Foerester, Brink and Gauthier are gonna be the most  offensively skilled players we have drafted in ages. I will  give him or the scouts credit for that, however he gets Zero point Zero for his trades and signings and I want him fired. Whoever the new GM is has to hit big in this draft to make up for the Nolan Patrick failure.
 

 

[flyercanuck]

11 hours ago, RonJeremy said:

Nobody expects fourth round guys to put up any points a few years after being drafted . It’s a small sampling but, Attard , who is a late pick, looked more than good in his NHL games . He is also having a solid rookie  season in the AHL and is probably the best dman on the Phantoms.  Desoyner,  who is another late pick is the leading goal scorer for the Phantoms in his rookie year. When was the last time a couple of late Flyer picks were two of the best players in their rookie year even in the AHL .

 

 

 Phil Myers and Egor Zamula weren't even drafted. Myers looked like a 1st rounder when he came in. Zamula has shown signs of that too. Neither has helped the Flyers win anything.

 

11 hours ago, RonJeremy said:

 

 

Foerester is also playing well and York is really coming on for the Flyers. I also think that Gauthier is the most advanced prospect at his age that we have had in ages. 

 

 I liked the Foerster pick. York? Fletcher passed on Caufield not once, but twice in that draft. His 23 goals would lead the Flyers this year. He would have been 1 goal off the team lead last year. Meanwhile York just cracked a terrible Flyer lineup. All I've seen of Gauthier was at the WJs. He looked good, but certainly nothing said superstar about him. His size, which is an advantage in junior won't be so much in the NHL. You know who stood out more than Gauthier by far in the WJs? David Jiricek, the guy who went right after him in the draft. Kid looks like a complete stud.

 

11 hours ago, RonJeremy said:

Don’t get me wrong, I hate Shmuck but I think his top draft picks like York, Foerester, Brink and Gauthier are gonna be the most  offensively skilled players we have drafted in ages. I will  give him or the scouts credit for that, however he gets Zero point Zero for his trades and signings and I want him fired. Whoever the new GM is has to hit big in this draft to make up for the Nolan Patrick failure.
 

 

Provorov tied for the league lead with 19 goals as a Flyer. True story. Konecny is leading the Flyers in scoring...again. Farabee looked like a much better player 2 years ago than he does now. Sanheim is our best defenceman. All Flyer draft picks.

 

York and Gauthier look like good players. Caufield and Jiricek look better. We could have taken both where we drafted. 

 

But yes, that is way better than he is at trades and signings. Passing on Caufield, twice, is not a genius move. Drafting Gauthier, 5th overall, is not a genius move. They aren't stupid moves like everything else he does. But they weren't brilliant either. I think a lot of people see that his draft picks don't come with franchise destroying contracts for lazyass players or ones with career ending injuries and are so beaten down by his incompetence that they actually look like genius moves in comparison. In comparison they are.....

Edited January 8, 2023 by flyercanuck

[SCFlyguy]

Keep the slobbering over Flyers draft picks who haven't done anything in the NHL yet to the prospects thread please.

[flyercanuck]

5 minutes ago, SCFlyguy said:

Flyers draft picks who haven't done anything in the NHL yet 

 

It's all we got.

[ruxpin]

6 hours ago, flyercanuck said:

York? Fletcher passed on Caufield not once, but twice in that draft. His 23 goals would lead the Flyers this year. He would have been 1 goal off the team lead last year. Meanwhile York just cracked a terrible Flyer lineup

 

I was all for the York pick. I really liked what I saw watching him.  I was concerned about his size.

 

I really thought Caufield was a juniors player that would be run over in the NHL.

 

The jury is still out on York but so far I was wrong on Caufield.  I think York is more about Tortorella being overly careful (no stones here; I'm okay with it).

 

Hard to prove the negative and I'm only mostly seriously:  if Caufield was drafted by the Flyers he'd already have been destroyed and on his second concussion and dealing with a core muscle injury.

 

You know I'm not wrong here.

 

 

[Podein25]

4 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

Hard to prove the negative and I'm only mostly seriously:  if Caufield was drafted by the Flyers he'd already have been destroyed and on his second concussion and dealing with a core muscle injury.

 

"The McCrossin Effect"

[flyercanuck]

17 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

I was all for the York pick. I really liked what I saw watching him.  I was concerned about his size.

 

I really thought Caufield was a juniors player that would be run over in the NHL.

 

The jury is still out on York but so far I was wrong on Caufield.  I think York is more about Tortorella being overly careful (no stones here; I'm okay with it).

 

Hard to prove the negative and I'm only mostly seriously:  if Caufield was drafted by the Flyers he'd already have been destroyed and on his second concussion and dealing with a core muscle injury.

 

You know I'm not wrong here.

 

 

 

Oh I absolutely doubt Caufield would be doing what he is in Philly. Injured or not.

[RonJeremy]

6 hours ago, flyercanuck said:

 

 

 Phil Myers and Egor Zamula weren't even drafted. Myers looked like a 1st rounder when he came in. Zamula has shown signs of that too. Neither has helped the Flyers win anything.

 

 

 I liked the Foerster pick. York? Fletcher passed on Caufield not once, but twice in that draft. His 23 goals would lead the Flyers this year. He would have been 1 goal off the team lead last year. Meanwhile York just cracked a terrible Flyer lineup. All I've seen of Gauthier was at the WJs. He looked good, but certainly nothing said superstar about him. His size, which is an advantage in junior won't be so much in the NHL. You know who stood out more than Gauthier by far in the WJs? David Jiricek, the guy who went right after him in the draft. Kid looks like a complete stud.

 

 

Provorov tied for the league lead with 19 goals as a Flyer. True story. Konecny is leading the Flyers in scoring...again. Farabee looked like a much better player 2 years ago than he does now. Sanheim is our best defenceman. All Flyer draft picks.

 

York and Gauthier look like good players. Caufield and Jiricek look better. We could have taken both where we drafted. 

 

But yes, that is way better than he is at trades and signings. Passing on Caufield, twice, is not a genius move. Drafting Gauthier, 5th overall, is not a genius move. They aren't stupid moves like everything else he does. But they weren't brilliant either. I think a lot of people see that his draft picks don't come with franchise destroying contracts for lazyass players or ones with career ending injuries and are so beaten down by his incompetence that they actually look like genius moves in comparison. In comparison they are.....

I wanted Caufield too or Boldy. We needed a sniper and both of those guys were big shooters and Caufield is looking like a future star but the Flyers never draft the highly skilled, but potentially flawed defensively type of player. We always draft the two way player, we picked Ricci over Jagr, Patrick over Makar for example. We always take the pickup truck over the Porsche .

 

It looks like we might end up with two good to solid players in York and Brink, over a one star in Caufield . Only time will tell how good or bad that trade was. The other thing is, Caufield would probably suck on the Flyers. We ruin players .

 

When we took Provorov over Werenski, initially it looked like the right pick cause Provy put up better numbers, now it looks like a mistake. Werenski took longer but is now the better player. As far as Jiricek and Gauthier, that's a similar situation. We won't know which was the right pick for a few years. If Shmuck didn't sign Risto and Coots wasn't hurt, we probably take Jiricek. 

 

The situation with our players regressing and not hitting their potential is a system wide problem. A guy like Provorov doesn't suddenly become stupid or lose his skill, it's gotta be mental. Lack of motivation,  bad coaching staff from top to bottom including the Phantoms coaches. If Torts can't get him on track, then I don't think anyone in Philly can. 

 

 

 

[RonJeremy]

5 hours ago, SCFlyguy said:

Keep the slobbering over Flyers draft picks who haven't done anything in the NHL yet to the prospects thread please.

The prospect were not projected to be immediate NHL players, so you can only slobber about them in the proper context and the league they currently play in.

[flyercanuck]

3 hours ago, RonJeremy said:

 

When we took Provorov over Werenski, initially it looked like the right pick cause Provy put up better numbers, now it looks like a mistake. Werenski took longer but is now the better player.

 

 

You think if we took Werenski he'd be the better player right now? Cause I highly doubt it. 

[aziz]

5 hours ago, RonJeremy said:

Caufield is looking like a future star

 

Is that Cole Caufield?  on pace for 65 points and a -18 in his 3rd NHL season, at the age of 22?  My gut-reaction hatred based on his last name notwithstanding, is that what stars look like in their 3rd year?  Is kind of a low bar for the title, no?  Especially as a tiny tiny guy that isn't going to bring much more than his point totals?

 

5 hours ago, RonJeremy said:

The situation with our players regressing and not hitting their potential is a system wide problem.

 

I think the problem is people thinking "potential" is a real thing.  It isn't.  Analysis of a 16/17 year old child, trying to project what they are going to be like when they are physically, mentally, and emotionally mature is hoodoo.  What were you like when you were 16?  What were you like when you were 25?  How accurately could anyone have projected 25 year old you from 16 year old you?  And you didn't have an insanely high pressure job, earning hundreds of thousands and then millions of dollars, while dealing with global media talking about you, and an entire city (and its expat fans) examining every second of your work.  All while physically battling with the best of the best of the best in your chosen career.

 

Draftees are children.  Kids.  Teenagers, with all of the crazy randomness that involves.  The are still in the middle of puberty.  How many disasters of classmates did you have in 10th grade, failed tests, didn't do homework, skipped class, smoked in the restroom, only to go to your 10 year reunion to discover they pulled their crap together and are doing really well for themselves?  And how many classmates did you have that seemed to have everything well in hand, only to learn they blew their life up by 25 and now work at a local supermarket, unmarried but with 3 kids, each from different partners?

 

They are kids.  Their "potential" is a measure of "in the best case, if everything goes perfectly, this person could end up doing X."  It is not "they will accomplish X, unless something weird happens".

 

There will always be Chris Grattons, and there will always be Pavel Datsyuks.  Scouts' projections of children are a vague "could be", not a "will be, barring bad coaching", or even a "will probably be".  Just "could be".  And, I should note, scouts project players' "potential" upside.  They don't investigate or prognosticate on how bad they could be, should they go sideways.  Or what might make them go sideways. 

 

Expect at least half of picks to fall well short of "could be".  That is normal.

 

Again, this is why I never take GMs to task over their drafting (unless they do something weird and dumb, like drafting a goalie with the 1st overall pick 3 years after drafting a goalie with the 4th overall pick.  Mike Milbury, you were always the worst at everything).  Or give them much credit when picks work out.  Kids will be kids, and turning into an adult is not a straight and predictable line.  We all seem to understand that generally, until it involves athletes.  Then people think the weirdness of late adolescence and early adulthood suddenly isn't a thing.

Edited January 8, 2023 by aziz