Scott Hartnell Extended for 6 Years

[fanaticV3.0]

What? I mentioned it once. Memorial Cup. Calder Cup. World Junior Gold. Geez, tough to please much?

I don't care how many times you mentioned it. I care that it, along with his time in LA, and his accomplishments in juniors are all you mentioned; especially when you tell me - a Flyers fan - about his leadership skills. If you are going to read off his resume to me, I simply want to know your opinion on all of it.

[Podein25]

I've already said how I felt about his leadership in Philly. He wasn't great and we didn't win. Lots of that is on him, though not all of it. Some of it is on Michael Leighton, for example.

Since you are being a bit of jerk here (which is fine, I'm one too). I will ask you once again. He's won everything. Has he just been lucky?

Edited September 6, 2012 by Podein25

[mojo1917]

Oh, I can think of one he played for that didn't win. It also happend to be the one where he was asked to play the biggest role. Is that a coincidence? I'm not trying to start **** with your or insult your favorite player, that's an honest qustion. You keep telling me he's won at every level. Ok. I'm asking you what you feel about his time here; and more specifically about his leadership qualities during that time.

he's far from my favorite player, but he is a good player and i can recognize that.

i think he was given the keys to the castle too soon with the flyers and became complacent, i also think he's not a natural with the press and this city's press corps has some super ******'s covering hockey and that didn't help matters a whole lot. He's never been a rah rah guy, and i wasn't in the room so i have no idea what he's like on a team, i know i saw him play with everyone from zherdev to carcillo to carter and MR tried to pull them to his level of play and commitment .

His time here was uneven, there were some nice surprises ECF run in 07/08, some great shifts ECF vs montreal, and some disappointments the ESF vs the Bruins. in 10/11. i wonder what we'd think of him if he didn't show up on the internet with chicks and booze ?

I don't know if I'd call his time in PHI a disappointment. I wouldn't call it wildly successful either. I don't view him or his tenure as black and white as you do obviously.

All I'm saying is winning teams follow that guy around. Just like baseball player Gary Matthews from the 70's and 80's.

[flyercanuck]

@fanaticV3.0

Richards was actually one of the few guys who looked like they gave a rats arse in LA (other than Quick) in the regular season...til he got hurt. $5 million isn't buying you an elite player these days. And Richards does bring more than stats to the table. He also wins at every level.

[fanaticV3.0]

@fanaticV3.0

Richards was actually one of the few guys who looked like they gave a rats arse in LA (other than Quick) in the regular season...til he got hurt. $5 million isn't buying you an elite player these days. And Richards does bring more than stats to the table. He also wins at every level.

I thought you were gonna say the POs, because I can at least agree he he good numbers then. I think he was along for the ride, but that's a separate issue. But when I read that you said the regular season, I almost did a double take. His points were horrible this past season, like Scott Hartnell before this year horrible. He dropped from his peak when he was still a Flyer and that's only continued.

But all of that aside, why are we still talking about LA? It's all you guys keep bringing up. It's like the bad didn't happen or something.

Edited September 6, 2012 by fanaticV3.0

[fanaticV3.0]

he's far from my favorite player, but he is a good player and i can recognize that.

i think he was given the keys to the castle too soon with the flyers and became complacent, i also think he's not a natural with the press and this city's press corps has some super ******'s covering hockey and that didn't help matters a whole lot. He's never been a rah rah guy, and i wasn't in the room so i have no idea what he's like on a team, i know i saw him play with everyone from zherdev to carcillo to carter and MR tried to pull them to his level of play and commitment .

His time here was uneven, there were some nice surprises ECF run in 07/08, some great shifts ECF vs montreal, and some disappointments the ESF vs the Bruins. in 10/11. i wonder what we'd think of him if he didn't show up on the internet with chicks and booze ?

I don't know if I'd call his time in PHI a disappointment. I wouldn't call it wildly successful either. I don't view him or his tenure as black and white as you do obviously.

All I'm saying is winning teams follow that guy around. Just like baseball player Gary Matthews from the 70's and 80's.

Don't put words into my mouth boss. I never said he wasn't good, I just said he wasn't a leader.

[mojo1917]

I don't view him or his tenure as black and white as you do obviously.

this is putting words in your mouth ?

really ?

[fanaticV3.0]

I've already said how I felt about his leadership in Philly. He wasn't great and we didn't win. Lots of that is on him, though not all of it. Some of it is on Michael Leighton, for example.

Since you are being a bit of jerk here (which is fine, I'm one too). I will ask you once again. He's won everything. Has he just been lucky?

His accomplishments in juniors means nothing to me. I'm not saying it didn't happen or that he didn't play an integral part, I just so happen to not give a f-ck. You know what it is to me? A reason to draft him, that's about it. It's potential. It stops meaning anything the second he joins the big, let alone how many years later? You're actually bragging about it this many years later as if it's something I should get excited about. He won in juniors, good for him. Who f-cking cares, now let's move on.

The Olypmic team was an all-star team. He played well for sure, but did they win because of him? Did he lead them to that gold medal? I can't say yes to that with confidence, especially when I look at the rest of his professional career. That doesn't mean I'm saying he wasn't good during the Olympics. He was good, I just can't say that team won because he led them. I don't think it's clear or obvious enough either way. What I do think is clear is his NHL career.

His time in Philly is unique because it's the only time aside from juniors - means nothing in the NHL - he's been asked to lead and he failed at that.

Finally, we have his time in LA. It was one of his worst seasons in quite some time. His team got hot at the right time and he wakes up. That's supposed to impress me? Richards was a passenger for that Cup. He played well in the PO, but that doesn't mean he led them to anything.

You know what I see when I look at that? A guy who plays well when surrounded with leaders, but when asked to be one hasn't delivered. I don't think that's unfair at all.If that hurts your feelings, sorry. I'm not really, but society tells me it's not socially acceptable to be that honest.

Edited September 6, 2012 by fanaticV3.0

[fanaticV3.0]

this is putting words in your mouth ?

really ?

Did I ever say he wasn't a good player? To quote a great man, "Show me where I said that."

[Podein25]

Did I ever say he wasn't a good player? To quote a great man, "Show me where I said that."

You said he was a 50 pt "supporting cast member"

Some might interpret that to mean "average" as opposed to good. I dunno

Anyway, we're going in circles. No need to apologize. I'm a big boy I can take and give a good argument.

[jammer2]

@fanaticV3.0 If he didn't deliver here, why did he DOMINATE the 2010 playoffs? Sure, he had a sub-par finals, but 23 points in 23 games played in the 2010 playoffs....that does not qualify for "can't handle the pressure". We would not have made it to the finals were it not for his heroic play that year. I was not a big fan of the partying etc, but he was money far more often than he sucked. He was an excellent Flyer, all the media crap aside.

[flyercanuck]

I thought you were gonna say the POs, because I can at least agree he he good numbers then. I think he was along for the ride, but that's a separate issue. But when I read that you said the regular season, I almost did a double take. His points were horrible this past season, like Scott Hartnell before this year horrible. He dropped from his peak when he was still a Flyer and that's only continued.

But all of that aside, why are we still talking about LA? It's all you guys keep bringing up. It's like the bad didn't happen or something.

Like I said, he played well UNTIL HE GOT HURT. I think he was LAs leading goal scorer at this point. The injury obviously affected him. Like it affected his play here sometimes. People would knock the guy then find out he needs surgery on both shoulders...the same people wouldn't even be playing under those conditions.

Maybe Richards would have brought the cup to Philly if the gm would have brought NHL calibre goaltending there? And his 75 and 80 point seasons were way better than anybody expected of him. You may not like the guy, but he was a good leader on the ice.

LAs all I keep bringing up? You've got a lot more posts about it than I do.

[fanaticV3.0]

@fanaticV3.0 If he didn't deliver here, why did he DOMINATE the 2010 playoffs? Sure, he had a sub-par finals, but 23 points in 23 games played in the 2010 playoffs....that does not qualify for "can't handle the pressure". We would not have made it to the finals were it not for his heroic play that year. I was not a big fan of the partying etc, but he was money far more often than he sucked. He was an excellent Flyer, all the media crap aside.

I know he had a good PO in 2010, but his finals performance is exactly my point. When the games mattered most, he kinda disappeared. Is that really so unfair to say? I'd say the same about Gagne and Carter that series too. Neither of them had a ppg in the PO like he did, but all 3 of them were not as good in the finals.

And we haven't even touched on the fact of how they made the PO. That team was filled with guys who didn't try hard until they realized they were about to be eliminated from a PO spot; and you can't absolve him from that.

[fanaticV3.0]

Like I said, he played well UNTIL HE GOT HURT. I think he was LAs leading goal scorer at this point. The injury obviously affected him. Like it affected his play here sometimes. People would knock the guy then find out he needs surgery on both shoulders...the same people wouldn't even be playing under those conditions. Maybe Richards would have brought the cup to Philly if the gm would have brought NHL calibre goaltending there? And his 75 and 80 point seasons were way better than anybody expected of him. You may not like the guy, but he was a good leader on the ice. LAs all I keep bringing up? You've got a lot more posts about it than I do.

How many games did he play last year? I forget the exact number, but it was well over half a season wasn't it?

I don't disagree that goaltending was a problem that year - like it is every other year - but they weren't good enough from top-to-bottom. They were a team with a decent amount of young talent, some nice vets, but not everybody was on the same page, nor did they apply themselves all of the time. He was a part of that. A big part.

[jammer2]

@fanaticV3.0 "And we haven't even touched on the fact of how they made the PO. That team was filled with guys who didn't try hard until they realized they were about to be eliminated from a PO spot; and you can't absolve him from that."

I have no memory of RIchards quitting on that team during the quest for a playoff spot, or before the stretch drive. The guy gave his all when he played, and I will have fond memories of him because of that.

[fanaticV3.0]

@fanaticV3.0 "And we haven't even touched on the fact of how they made the PO. That team was filled with guys who didn't try hard until they realized they were about to be eliminated from a PO spot; and you can't absolve him from that."

I have no memory of RIchards quitting on that team during the quest for a playoff spot, or before the stretch drive. The guy gave his all when he played, and I will have fond memories of him because of that.

Richards, Carter, and Gagne all **** the bed in that cup against Chicago. It was a total failure in leadership. Sure it came after the whole Boston thing and making the PO in the miraculous manner they did, but it's the end that matters most.

That was the thing with that team. They were either on fire or choking. I’m glad that core was broken up. You just don’t win (very often) playing that way.