Howie58 Posted April 12 Author Share Posted April 12 39 minutes ago, ruxpin said: I suspect these two things are connected. It's really the only explanation. Yes, after waiting 49 years for a Cup, this is divine intervention, telling me to stay away. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 (edited) 7 hours ago, FD19372 said: Gostisbehere on the ice for the Penguins game-winning goal. Made a lazy play. Imagine that. I don't miss him being in Orange and Black, like some on the board do here. He's a defensive liability. I don't think it's so much people missing Ghost...it was that the idiot who traded him AND a 2nd just to get rid of him, then dealt a crapload of picks and players for Ristolainen, who was a worse defenceman. With a bigger contract. Then re-signed him! Edited April 12 by flyercanuck 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howie58 Posted April 12 Author Share Posted April 12 After reading the recaps, it appears to be the kind of game we can win. Our goalie was well above average--something like a 960 save percentage. Apparently, our D was OK....and we actually scored. That is "structured" Flyers hockey....the Hakstol-Torts link. Jordan Hall even used that in his write up. Yeah...to win, particularly against a good team...that's our path forward. On a positive note, I'm glad Cates seems to be finding some late-season scoring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 Everything's great. Rebuild back on schedule - ahead even. Beat the Caps and make the playoffs. Good sign. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GratefulFlyers Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 what a whackjob team.... I'd love to believe in the Flyers, in Jones/Briere and Tortorella but how can I? What kind of team spends weeks sabotaging their PO hopes then goes into MSG and beats maybe the best team in the NHL? Beats them convincingly too. This team makes no sense to me. It's like a switch was flipped back to "ON" and last night they started playing professional hockey again. whackjobs... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 47 minutes ago, GratefulFlyers said: what a whackjob team.... I'd love to believe in the Flyers, in Jones/Briere and Tortorella but how can I? What kind of team spends weeks sabotaging their PO hopes then goes into MSG and beats maybe the best team in the NHL? Beats them convincingly too. This team makes no sense to me. It's like a switch was flipped back to "ON" and last night they started playing professional hockey again. whackjobs... It's honestly that any given night a professional hockey team can beat another professional hockey team. It's doing it 16 times in four seven game series that's the trick... 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCFlyguy Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 (edited) 1 hour ago, GratefulFlyers said: what a whackjob team.... I'd love to believe in the Flyers, in Jones/Briere and Tortorella but how can I? What kind of team spends weeks sabotaging their PO hopes then goes into MSG and beats maybe the best team in the NHL? Beats them convincingly too. This team makes no sense to me. It's like a switch was flipped back to "ON" and last night they started playing professional hockey again. whackjobs... You are just the weirdest person. There is no switch. The Flyers' points percentage is .531, while the Rangers is .688, a difference of .157. I could be completely off, but that would suggest that at worst that the Flyers would be expected to get about 35% of the points when playing the Rangers, which is winning about 1 in 3 games. (Someone please correct me if my math is off.) We are also talking a handful of games between them, so the difference between winning 1 of 4 vs. 2 of 4 is a huge swing. Maybe I will start a Grateful Dead thread where we can geek out on shows, because I don't get your views on hockey. But I'm worried you are going to come along and tell me the Brent years are the best era. Edited April 12 by SCFlyguy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojo1917 Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 (edited) Not going to lie. I'm glad they beat the Rangers. I hate that they're so good. I hate that they rebuilt their team in 2 years. I do like the sweaters... but really **** that whole organization. @SCFlyguy the points per games percentage is game / wins. Yes? It just means the Rangers win more frequently than the Flyers by that percentage. I think while your math is fine, but using winning % doesn't take into account playing head-to-head, it's of all the games both teams play, the Rangers win more frequently. Edited April 12 by mojo1917 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyerrod Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 (edited) 2 hours ago, SCFlyguy said: You are just the weirdest person. There is no switch. The Flyers' points percentage is .531, while the Rangers is .688, a difference of .157. I could be completely off, but that would suggest that at worst that the Flyers would be expected to get about 35% of the points when playing the Rangers, which is winning about 1 in 3 games. (Someone please correct me if my math is off.) We are also talking a handful of games between them, so the difference between winning 1 of 4 vs. 2 of 4 is a huge swing. Maybe I will start a Grateful Dead thread where we can geek out on shows, because I don't get your views on hockey. But I'm worried you are going to come along and tell me the Brent years are the best era. The fact that you are implying the Flyers are in the same class as the Rags baffles me. Love the Flyers, HATE the Rags but do I think the Flyers are competitive vs the Rags, no, not currently. Too many injuries and too few competent players. Edited April 12 by flyerrod Grammar nazi on myself Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GratefulFlyers Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 3 hours ago, radoran said: It's honestly that any given night a professional hockey team can beat another professional hockey team. This is true but imho it only applies to last night's game in the most general sense. Parity has grown steadily since the salary cap but what we saw last night had little to do with parity. The game wasn't a one-off; it was potentially (and expected to be) the Flyers' 9th consecutive loss. Instead they go into MSG and play the kind of hockey that had them sitting 3rd in the Metro for months. The biggest on-ice factor that allowed the Flyers to beat the Rangers last night was Ersson playing so well. When the Flyers get the early big save(s) they can play their game. When they don't they (naturally) go into a shell and since their talent is not very deep on either side of the puck the game is basically over for them. We've seen losing streaks before but the Flyers most recent one has been remarkable. For it to end against the best team in the NHL (%-wise) with a complete 180... in attitude, confidence, execution, in every aspect of the game ... that wasn't about "anyone can beat anyone" that was ... frankly I don't know what that was...and I have no idea if we'll see it again tomorrow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 3 minutes ago, GratefulFlyers said: frankly I don't know what that was...and I have no idea if we'll see it again tomorrow. You took a long ways to get back to what I said in the first place. All of the things are factors in all of the games. Rags lost to the Pens and Isles in the last 10 days. Late season division games against teams pushing for the playoffs while you're pushing for a team record in wins. Again, any given night. Back on the bubble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GratefulFlyers Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 3 hours ago, radoran said: You took a long ways to get back to what I said in the first place. Hardly that. You said ACBAOAGN explains the result. I said it doesn't. "Anyone can beat anyone..." is obviously true but it sheds no light on what happened. It's like saying, "there were a lot of Flyers' fans at MSG last night." That's undoubtedly true (there always are) but it's irrelevant or incidental to the outcome. I offered a partial explanation for the result, namely how well Ersson played. But why he and the Flyers suddenly played so well, that's what I find interesting don't you? The parity among NHL teams can't help us with that. The team is so unpredictable now I called them "whack jobs" and imho it's a fitting description. Some games this year ACBA probably is the best explanation. In Dallas, in Winnipeg, in Sunrise ... but after going winless in 8, to get some perspective on whipping the legitimate Cup-favorite Rangers 4-1 at MSG (who were trying to secure the #1 seed) I need more than "anyone can beat anyone." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCFlyguy Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 Maybe this is the turning point and it’s all Stanley Cup from here, lol. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 1 hour ago, GratefulFlyers said: I offered a partial explanation for the result, namely how well Ersson played. But why he and the Flyers suddenly played so well, that's what I find interesting don't you? You previous point was not knowing whether or if they would play the same way again. That is ACBAOAGN. When, as @SCFlyguy has shown, you are typically getting 62% of your potential points, you are a league of difference away from 51%. It's the very difference between a team playing for the President's Cup and one hoping they beat Washington at the end of the season to possibly face them. The Rangers can afford a stinker in game 78. The Flyers need to be nearly flawless AND get mistakes from the other team. I'm looking for the Flyers to be on a reasonable trajectory to be in the former position than the latter. Getting back to where they were for the most futile decade of hockey in franchise history honestly, truly does not excite me a little bit. YMMV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GratefulFlyers Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 6 hours ago, radoran said: You previous point was not knowing whether or if they would play the same way again. That is ACBAOAGN. I see. So it's basically a crap shoot. I accept that if we're talking about where the Flyers are now. But earlier in the season they played consistently good, fast hockey - goaltending was solid - and it wasn't a crap shoot at all. Certainly ACBA is "the bottom line" it's just not very helpful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 1 hour ago, GratefulFlyers said: I see. So it's basically a crap shoot. I accept that if we're talking about where the Flyers are now. But earlier in the season they played consistently good, fast hockey - goaltending was solid - and it wasn't a crap shoot at all. Certainly ACBA is "the bottom line" it's just not very helpful. Earlier in the season doesn't win you any cups. Now is when games matter. The Flyers put on a nice show for part of the year. Then when the real teams started gearing up they folded like a cheap suit. Then, HEY!! they won A game! They'd get their asses handed to them in the playoffs. And if they keep drafting in the middle of the pack, we can keep saying this every year. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCFlyguy Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 2 hours ago, GratefulFlyers said: I see. So it's basically a crap shoot. I accept that if we're talking about where the Flyers are now. But earlier in the season they played consistently good, fast hockey - goaltending was solid - and it wasn't a crap shoot at all. Certainly ACBA is "the bottom line" it's just not very helpful. Helpful to what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 4 hours ago, GratefulFlyers said: I see. So it's basically a crap shoot. I accept that if we're talking about where the Flyers are now. But earlier in the season they played consistently good, fast hockey - goaltending was solid - and it wasn't a crap shoot at all. Certainly ACBA is "the bottom line" it's just not very helpful. Things aren't special because they happen to the Flyers. Occam's Razor - the theorem, not the poster - is a very useful tool (*ahem* ). The most likely answer is probably correct. The Flyers losing to the Cup Finalist Rangers 4-3 in the first round 10 years ago wasn't "a good sign." Them beating the Rangers 4-1 in Game 79 this year isn't "a good sign." Stop reading tea leaves and look at the broader picture. This team does not have the talent to win 16 playoff games. Beating Edmonton, the Rangers, and Colorado in the regular season doesn't mean they can hang with them in a seven game series. We know this because we've been watching this show for a decade. They do have the talent to beat anyone on any given night - based in no small part upon how that opponent plays. The Rangers had an off night. The Flyers put it all together. The Rangers are a top team that can recover from an off night. The Flyers - by your own evaluation - are a mystery that no one knows who's going to show up each night. That is a vast gap in hockey and the difference between a legit Cup contender and a middling bubble playoff team. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GratefulFlyers Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 25 minutes ago, radoran said: Stop reading tea leaves and look at the broader picture. "reading tea leaves" is picking apart shifts or maybe speculating about the "soul of the team" or some such twaddle. I'm sure avoided it in this thread. And I understand now why we're not connecting: we're looking from different altitudes. You look from 40K feet and conclude, 54 minutes ago, radoran said: The Rangers had an off night. The Flyers put it all together. and that's unquestionably true. Apparently that explains it for you. Fair enough. I can't disagree with that or anything else in your post. It's just that (to me) after what happened in Montreal (and the preceding weeks) the Flyers' performance at MSG was so out of the blue there's no shrugging it off with "eh, no great shakes sometimes ACBA." I'm not looking for some deep meaning but there's more to it than "shithappens." The timing of the performance and the performance itself are both in their own WTF? category. As an ending to Flyers' losing streaks that one was the most unexpected and by far the most confounding (hence: "whack jobs"). To put it in perspective we don't need tea leaves but we do - I do - need more than ACBA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 (edited) 3 hours ago, GratefulFlyers said: To put it in perspective we don't need tea leaves but we do - I do - need more than ACBA. Stay on the search. You want to pick apart shifts and sift through the sands looking for a deeper answer - have at it. Report back. Let us know what you find. Edited April 13 by radoran Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.