So where do we go from here?

[trevluk]

Normally, I would agree with this. But Montreal doesn't even have him under contract. Montreal does not have us over a barrel. We don't have to make a deal with them or anyone, but Montreal is weaker every game they don't have this guy under contract, and the frustration between them probably increases.

But Montreal owns his rights so I am guessing that we would need to trade players for him and then have to work out a contract on our own, correct?

[pilldoc]

This is a great thread. I am upset as are many.

One thought comes to mind And Meltzer's take has an element of my thinking. The one constant of this team since the first strike is inconsistency. It is between and within games and seasons. Our deepest playoff runs have been "flukey." And this seems to be an issue regardless of coach.

What does it mean? I can't answer the question but will ask questions.

1) Is Homer a strategist or an opportunist?

2) Is this organization "blind" in terms of goaltending and defensive recruitment-development?

3) Is this franchise still wedded to "old-style" hockey that puts physicality over speed/skill?

4) Have we been patient enough to develop a cadre of young players as a cohesive whole?

I think the last may be important because on paper, this is a good group of youngsters. But...it may be "forward centric" and we don't know if it will gel into a real unit. Lavy may be a problem. And if there are few more losses to start the season, we may not have time to test the theory of "coach vs. other." But the patterns we observe are long-standing. My training and outlook say we have a "system" problem that starts with management. Homer is ballsy. But that may not be a substitute for drafting and patience.

Peace,

Howie

@Howie58

Great Questions! I don't have all the answers either, but let me make the attempt.

1. Homer is IMO, an oppurtunist. He has gone out and gone after the bold moves trying to make this team a contender year after year. Are bold moves considered a stadegy? I don't know. He went after Briere / Kimmo / Hartnell the year after they totally sucked. Bold moves to make this team a contender now. He went after Pronger. He went after Bryz after Snider probably told him enough of the goalie carousel. He attempted at Suter / Parise / Weber. Sucks that none of them panned out. Jagr was certainly an oppurtunistic move. Talbot was brought in for his vetern leadership / grit / and locker room persona.

Now about the Carter / Richards trades. ARe they considered bold moves...YES...but I think those had some stradegy involved. None of the players coming to the Flyers had much experience. It was finally a youth movement. The M.O. of this team has always been to reload...never a complete rebuild. In years past, moves were always made out of desperation never with the future in mind.

2. In regards to goalie / d-man development. YES! This is a fatal flaw of Homer's thinking. I can't remember the last time we developed a goalie. Cechmanek?? Nitty?? I can't remember the last time we kept a d-man, developed him and he remained with the Flyers. Chris Therien?

Recent Picks:

From 2009 - present No d-man even remotely close to being NHL ready

From 2008: Bourdon (out indefinitley with concussion symptoms) / Sbisa (Traded)

From 2005: Bartulis (waived / traded)

From 2003 Picard (forgot what happened to him)

From 2002: Joni Pitkanen (traded---> servicable d-man now in NHL)

From 2001 Jeff Woywitka (traded)

Most of the d-men the Flyers drafted are no names.

So yes. For whatever reasons, this organization does not do a good job developing defensemen.

3. We are Flyer fans and most of us were brought up with the Broad Street Bulley mentality. Once the NHL changed its style of play from brute force to more a finesse game, the Flyers never fully adapted. Yes we have had finesse players..aka Giroux / Briere, the typical Flyer is more of a blue coller worker. The NHL changed. Sadly the Flyers never fully committed to the new NHL and now we are trying to play catch up.

4. No. Most of the fan base wants instant gratifiaction and to contend for the cup every year. Flyer fans in general are afraid for the wait and see development necessary. We have, for the most part been spoiled with success this franchise has brought us. We want no part of the wait and see process. Last year Homer finally decided to go with a youth movement with a sprinkle of veterns. Now we have alot of young players with potential and it is tough for us to watch at times.

The old adage you reap what you sow is so true for this team. We may not like the results of this season, but we must endure them if this franchise is too move forward.

Thanks for some great questions Howie......

[brelic]

But Montreal owns his rights so I am guessing that we would need to trade players for him and then have to work out a contract on our own, correct?

Yeah, there is the small matter of a contract I don't know if his issue is with Montreal or just what's being offered.

[pilldoc]

@brelic

great posts. can't add much more to them.

[Howie58]

@Howie58

Great Questions! I don't have all the answers either, but let me make the attempt.

1. Homer is IMO, an oppurtunist. He has gone out and gone after the bold moves trying to make this team a contender year after year. Are bold moves considered a stadegy? I don't know. He went after Briere / Kimmo / Hartnell the year after they totally sucked. Bold moves to make this team a contender now. He went after Pronger. He went after Bryz after Snider probably told him enough of the goalie carousel. He attempted at Suter / Parise / Weber. Sucks that none of them panned out. Jagr was certainly an oppurtunistic move. Talbot was brought in for his vetern leadership / grit / and locker room persona.

Now about the Carter / Richards trades. ARe they considered bold moves...YES...but I think those had some stradegy involved. None of the players coming to the Flyers had much experience. It was finally a youth movement. The M.O. of this team has always been to reload...never a complete rebuild. In years past, moves were always made out of desperation never with the future in mind.

2. In regards to goalie / d-man development. YES! This is a fatal flaw of Homer's thinking. I can't remember the last time we developed a goalie. Cechmanek?? Nitty?? I can't remember the last time we kept a d-man, developed him and he remained with the Flyers. Chris Therien?

Recent Picks:

From 2009 - present No d-man even remotely close to being NHL ready

From 2008: Bourdon (out indefinitley with concussion symptoms) / Sbisa (Traded)

From 2005: Bartulis (waived / traded)

From 2003 Picard (forgot what happened to him)

From 2002: Joni Pitkanen (traded---> servicable d-man now in NHL)

From 2001 Jeff Woywitka (traded)

Most of the d-men the Flyers drafted are no names.

So yes. For whatever reasons, this organization does not do a good job developing defensemen.

3. We are Flyer fans and most of us were brought up with the Broad Street Bulley mentality. Once the NHL changed its style of play from brute force to more a finesse game, the Flyers never fully adapted. Yes we have had finesse players..aka Giroux / Briere, the typical Flyer is more of a blue coller worker. The NHL changed. Sadly the Flyers never fully committed to the new NHL and now we are trying to play catch up.

4. No. Most of the fan base wants instant gratifiaction and to contend for the cup every year. Flyer fans in general are afraid for the wait and see development necessary. We have, for the most part been spoiled with success this franchise has brought us. We want no part of the wait and see process. Last year Homer finally decided to go with a youth movement with a sprinkle of veterns. Now we have alot of young players with potential and it is tough for us to watch at times.

The old adage you reap what you sow is so true for this team. We may not like the results of this season, but we must endure them if this franchise is too move forward.

Thanks for some great questions Howie......

Pilldoc:

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. Maybe we will live to see another Cup!

Best,

Howie