Giroux rips Flyers after loss

[murraycraven]

Now we are running G out of town by saying his post game comments are Richarda-esque? Unreal....

[doom88]

I don't care much about what G says into a mic. It's behind the closed doors that matters. As entertaining as it was, we fans had no business knowing about "dry island".

G was probably treading lightly speaking into a mic, because he didn't want to throw his team under the bus, and make the room more divided.

[phlfly]

Giroux needs to score goals, but his comments are useless as he didn't do his job. Flyers traded Richie and Carter to keep Giroux as number one Flyer guy. A bunch cry babies, . uked them.

[canoli]

yah I agree I don't know about judging Giroux's captaincy on his post-games. I mean think about it - we're getting a glimpse, that's it. A handful of clown-ish hockey beat writers circle around him and feed him stupid-ass questions night after night and he answers them because he has to. It's not like he's holding a presser and saying "we're going thru the motions."

OTOH here's how stupid and lame the hockey media is in Philly. Giroux makes those tepid comments - and I agree there was no "conviction" coming thru at all (i just disagree it means anything) - and the headlines are all about "GIROUX RIPS TEAMMATES AFTER LOSS!"

I mean are you kidding me? IF that counts as "ripping" them then we're all in trouble as Flyers' fans. Luckily it doesn't mean a damn thing because it's our lame hockey "reporters" making stuff up is all.

[canoli]

I know Hartnell is out, but is there anyone that truly believes he is a difference maker?

I do. On this incarnation of the Philadelphia Flyers I do.

You're right he wasn't much to rave about before he was injected onto that top line. Then again he was awfully clutch in that 2010 PO run, esp in the Comeback Series vs Boston. He wasn't "nothing" and he wasn't "all mistakes all the time" he just wasn't a 30-goal scorer who you could count on. Is he now? I doubt it. But what he is is a guy who creates time and space for his linemates, a guy who harrasses opposing goalies and gets in their face all game long (when he's doing his job) and I feel like he's a major cog in the wheel that's broken right now without him. He's the glue - or part of it - that gives the team some identity.

I really believe he's under-valued by a lot and hopefully he proves me right when he comes back - next week I hear. (this coming week)

[brelic]

Did you actually hear his post-game? I agree with much of what you said, but the reason I ask is this: Did his post-game sound almost Richards-esque to you? I mean, I don't know what he's supposed to say or how he's supposed to say it, but it just seemed to lack conviction to me. Maybe it was the cliches you're talking about that made me grimace, but the post-game annoyed me.

No, I didn't actually hear this particular interview. I was at a friend's house (Habs fan) watching the game. Even he couldn't believe how listless the Flyers looked. I know it was the second game of a B2B, and 4th game in 5 nights. That's got to be tough on the body for sure. But they squandered 4 PP opportunities in the 2nd that would have gotten them back in the game. Montreal's PP% this year is not much better, but the way the force our box to collapse around the goalie, getting tighter and tighter is more of the stuff we should be doing. Our PP is all perimeter, and quite non-threatening. I see they've got Brayden in Hartnell's old spot, waiting for the one timer on a pass from G.

But, yeah, I know what you mean about him sounding Richards-esque at times. I guess if you're interviewed over and over by the media and forced to come up with reasons why you don't win every single hockey game, you're going to resort to platitudes after a while. But Pronger somehow made it sound like *he* was in control of the interview, not the other way around. He would say what he wanted to say, and no one was going to push him to talk or say anything he didn't feel like talking about. He has a commanding presence and leadership that a captain should have. Giroux just seems like a meek guy who does an incredible job on the ice with his talent, but he doesn't seem like a leader-type.

[canoli]

but it doesn't help if players are looking to G for leadership.

I respectfully disagree with this. By all accounts Giroux is the hardest worker, the most dedicated to improving as a player, the craziest about winning a shift vs. losing a shift...exactly the kind of guy you want leading your team.

Just because he's struggling this year - compared to last year - we don't have any basis for questioning his leadership or dedication. Well maybe going by the results so far we do. But to me that would be an extremely superficial reading of the situation. He's one guy and we have good reason to expect more from him. Absolutely. But I don't believe we should question his leadership 15 games (however many) into his captaincy.

[Phillygrump]

Claude and Kimmo said the same thing and the are right... everyone in that locker room including the coaching staff should be embarrassed.

I hate to say it but this team is soft. Maybe we will catch a break and find ourselves in position to get seth jones in the draft. This team is going nowhere... ugly.

So who is it that is not showing up night after night? This is a fairly young team up front and if there are younger guys not willing to compete hard then they are not really worth having up with the club. How can you have pro athletes that are going to dog it?

Not only are you not being a competitor, but you are slacking off on your job.

[murraycraven]

I think richards and carter were traded for more than richards post game comments... face it, as soon as pronger came on he was the defacto captain anyway. Richards and carter partied their way out of town... the club, wrong or right, decided it was the right thing to do and now G is the man. What he says in post game should have no bearing on his captaincy...

How many games are we into his captaincy? It is ludicrous to question it at this point... G being 100% right now would not make this a contender

[murraycraven]

@ phillygrump... only the players know who it is at this point. I think most people make too much out of everything said postgame to be honest. What is so bad about realizing this team just is not that good? Maybe there does not need to be a storyline other than lack of talent...

They are young and inexperienced... the defense is terrible and have aging scorers (#48)... last year simmonds, talbot and hartnell had career years and i would not expect them to repeat honestly.

[ruxpin]

Now we are running G out of town by saying his post game comments are Richarda-esque? Unreal....

It would be unreal if that is what was being done. It isn't. Calm down.

What I am saying, however, is that many of us railed against Richards not for on-ice performance, necessarily, but how he spoke to the media. I guess my point is that it is isn't all that different. The team is playing like crap and he's the captain. I'm not sure what the hell he is supposed to say or how he's supposed to say it. He's a young kid trying to make his way in his first year as captain. It would have been nice for him to have a vet to lean on, but that doesn't seem to be there (Timo notwithstanding). It just sounded Richards-esque to me. Possibly because once again we have a team playing poorly, no apparent direction from the coach, no veteran leadership apparent, and a young inexperienced captain trying to survive being put in front of microphones trying to explain it game after game.

I, for one, would not talk about running Giroux out of town for anything.

[ruxpin]

Giroux just seems like a meek guy who does an incredible job on the ice with his talent, but he doesn't seem like a leader-type.

I think that is about where I am. I appreciate he's young and inexperienced in the role and maybe that will come. It just seems he's more the type to lead by example on the ice than to give a press conference. If I have to get one or the other, I'll take the guy who leads on the ice every time. It's just painful to watch such a listless hockey game and then hear, "gee, shucks, we gotta skate for 60 minutes. Give it 110%. Everybody's gotta pull their weight. Yadda yadda."

This isn't about Giroux or even the post game for me at this point. It's just FIX IT, DAMNIT!

(By the way, the person typing these posts is the very same guy who went into the season saying he was disinterested. Ain't that a hoot?)

[ruxpin]

We dont have to "trade now" for christ sake... that is the issue... the young kids are strong. Let them develop together! This season is all but toast anyway. Making a desperation move means nothing and will do nothing... they are simply an a average team at best.

I can't agree with this more. The window-dressing type players that aren't really up to the task (Walker, Foster, Feds, etc) won't get you anything in a trade anyway. Keep the young kids and nurture them and try to do a much better job of building around them in the off-season (FA, draft, trade, whatever). We've all bi*ched for years about how this organization doesn't stick with its kids. Well, this is the growing pains you go through when building with kids. I completely agree with you that patience (and a smarter front office, frankly) is the way to go.

Doesn't mean I won't stop whining along the way.

[murraycraven]

Rux... i am calm but seriously why on earth do we compare G to Richards? Fine, they are both/were captains but for heavens sake it is pretty early in Girouxs captaincy to say he is being Richard-esque.

He called out his teammates and he should... frankly, this team sucks right now and it starts with G. Kimmo and Briere said the same thing so i guess they are being richards or carter-esque too? No offense and i tend to agree but i think many people look for a story where there is none.

They are simply not that good...

[brelic]

I respectfully disagree with this. By all accounts Giroux is the hardest worker, the most dedicated to improving as a player, the craziest about winning a shift vs. losing a shift...exactly the kind of guy you want leading your team.

Exactly. I completely agree about Giroux's traits. But that does not make him a leader in the locker room. It makes him a talented guy who has a great work ethic. You know, it's rarely the smartest people or the hardest workers that lead corporations. It's actually been shown that many CEOs, Presidents, and corporate heads are C students. They have something intangible that makes people want to follow them. They know how to get people to listen, and they know how to get people from point A to point Z.

Just because he's struggling this year - compared to last year - we don't have any basis for questioning his leadership or dedication. Well maybe going by the results so far we do. But to me that would be an extremely superficial reading of the situation. He's one guy and we have good reason to expect more from him. Absolutely. But I don't believe we should question his leadership 15 games (however many) into his captaincy.

I'm not questioning it 15 games into his captaincy. I never really believed he should be captain. Not because of some silly curse or anything like that, but because I saw no compelling reason to suggest that he was some sort of leader. Maybe he is, and we just never see that side of him. But he doesn't sound like one.

Did we have any other great options? Maybe not, but that doesn't make Giroux any better at leading because there weren't better options.

Again, maybe he will emerge someday as a great leader. I really hope he does. I just don't see that now.

[brelic]

It would be unreal if that is what was being done. It isn't. Calm down.

What I am saying, however, is that many of us railed against Richards not for on-ice performance, necessarily, but how he spoke to the media. I guess my point is that it is isn't all that different. The team is playing like crap and he's the captain. I'm not sure what the hell he is supposed to say or how he's supposed to say it. He's a young kid trying to make his way in his first year as captain. It would have been nice for him to have a vet to lean on, but that doesn't seem to be there (Timo notwithstanding). It just sounded Richards-esque to me. Possibly because once again we have a team playing poorly, no apparent direction from the coach, no veteran leadership apparent, and a young inexperienced captain trying to survive being put in front of microphones trying to explain it game after game.

I, for one, would not talk about running Giroux out of town for anything.

Me neither. But I know it when I hear it. The way Pronger shielded his team from criticism in the SCF by stealing pucks an shifting the focus on him instead was something good leaders do. Now, that's not to say they didn't deserve to be criticized, but when the puck theft became the main storyline, it took the pressure of his teammates, and Pronger was more than happy to oblige the silly media with a bunch of nonsense to sell their papers.

And @canoli @murraycraven I think you guys are reading too much into my comments. I'm not saying Giroux is like Richards at all. Only that the way he handled the media yesterday after a humiliating loss was kinda the same way Richards would do it. It just seemed like a whole lot of nothing.

[canoli]

but because I saw no compelling reason to suggest that he was some sort of leader.

"I don't know who you're putting out there but I want that first shift."

Kind of hard to factor in a statement like that and reconcile it with your view isn't it? To me anybody who says that to their HC - and then goes out and delivers (in a huge way) is a born leader. But I don't base my opinion on that one comment alone. I'm saying that one comment suggests he's said all sorts of "leadership-type" things that haven't been reported.

[Mad Dog]

Many good points in this thread.

Regarding Giroux, I don’t know if it’s too early, but I don’t see much familiarity with Richards in terms of leadership. I certainly think it’s too early to conclude whether he is a captain material. One thing I know, they did it in heist, again. Somebody in this thread mentioned that they did it almost by default, because there is nobody else on this team is worth being called a leader. Sad, isn’t it? I mean when you give the C to a guy who in your opinion is a so-so leader, but you do it because there is nobody worthier, perhaps that, right there, at least partially explains what plagues this team right now.

@canoli

I understand your points loud and clear. I would like to believe also. And I can see why you think the return of Hartnell (and maybe to a lesser degree Meszaros) will change things around. I would love nothing more than share your belief and optimism, but I just think this team has way too many areas to correct for one person to be able to fix. From my couch and the stands of the Wells Fargo Center, what seems very glaring to me is the lack of unity. The players just don’t seem to be playing for one another. This is evident in not finishing checks, not covering your man, taking bad shots, and just the overall lackadaisical attitude of the guys. This team needs a major shake-up, and at this point I am not sure Hartnell can provide it. I am not sure *anybody* can provide that.

[murraycraven]

Rux... i totally get where you are coming from. I think G was the right choice and i expect growing pains with this core of players... they are so young and that, if it works, is a great thing...

I know giroux is a great player but schenn, cooter, and jake we are kind of hoping they turn out the way they are predicted. Schenn and cooter have not given me any faith this year that we made the right moves in trading richards... i hope it works out and think we need to give it some time to see what we really have...

[murraycraven]

I also think having a real d corps would help.

People give Bryz **** all the time but never want to realize the guy is playing in front of a terribly pedestrian defense... I see no point in spending a ton of $$ on a goalie if you are going to put garbage in front of him. This defense is terrible...

Gervais, lilja, foster... ugly!

Sorry... just need to vent! Fn team has my nuts in a bunch!

[canoli]

And I can see why you think the return of Hartnell (and maybe to a lesser degree Meszaros) will change things around.

Actually what I said was:

"But once Harts is back, Mez is back...we *may* see the TEAM come together and start giving the effort required to win hockey games."

I see the same deficiencies you do. I commented earlier that, while the concern over Lavy's style and Homer's ability are valid I didn't think either one explained the Flyers' woes better than what looks to be a general "lack of effort" by the skaters. With a few exceptions I see little regard for the TEAM aspect of the team (if you follow me).

Like you pointed out,

The players just don’t seem to be playing for one another. This is evident in not finishing checks, not covering your man, taking bad shots, and just the overall lackadaisical attitude of the guys.

I don't know about the "not finishing checks" part; I see us hitting, not shying away from the physical game. But yeah, the poor shot selection, the blown assignments, the result of poor positional play - in all 3 zones - maybe are all because of the "overall lackadaisical attitude" - and that's troubling.

Thinking about it more, my "lack of effort" and your "lackadaisical attitude" critique ... maybe there are some reasons for it worth considering. Start with how the Flyers play. Night after night guys are scrambling to chase down weak passes, watching teammates blow the most fundamental assignments ... forced into foot races to negate an icing, on a puck that should've been controlled...etc. You get in those positions often enough you may develop a "Fk it" attitude. You may start going through the motions. Even without the attitude when you're constantly covering mistakes it just kills your legs...the 3rd rolls around and you got nothing.

This team needs a major shake-up, and at this point I am not sure Hartnell can provide it. I am not sure *anybody* can provide that.

I think I clarified what I believe Hartnell can provide. As far as a "major shake-up" I agree the team needs one ASAP...right now. A trade won't do much good (can't replace 5, 6 guys) and firing Lavy won't accomplish much either because I think the captain is right when he said "We're just going through the motions."

If I could tell you how I'd fix that I'd be employed in professional hockey somewhere I guess.

[jammer2]

@canoli "I respectfully disagree with this. By all accounts Giroux is the hardest worker, the most dedicated to improving as a player, the craziest about winning a shift vs. losing a shift...exactly the kind of guy you want leading your team.

Just because he's struggling this year - compared to last year - we don't have any basis for questioning his leadership or dedication. Well maybe going by the results so far we do. But to me that would be an extremely superficial reading of the situation. He's one guy and we have good reason to expect more from him. Absolutely. But I don't believe we should question his leadership 15 games (however many) into his captaincy."

Nice post Can, could not have said it any better. To add to your wise words....Giroux was probably never a captain before, he was not drafted to the OHL, added on to a QHL team on a try out....I would bet he was not captain in midget or pee-wee either. He has had to work his way up the ladder, scratching and clawing his way into a career. Of course there will be a learning curve, he has never done this before. It's a load of responiblity, and someone like him will put pressure on himself to be the best captain he can be, even though he is just feeling his way through it right now, learning on the fly.

Giroux was made captain because he has a unmatched will to win, a dazzling work ethic and a straight up wicked skill set. Not making excuses for the guy, but he does not look like himself, somebody else mentioned the Germany injury, and I'm starting to wonder if he is fully healed from that. I can understand not getting points, being snakebit....whatever....but he does not look like himself, almost like he is labouring to do things he used to blast through....the famous dogged forecheck is missing.....players just don't turn into something else, a hard worker will work....it's a part of who they are and how they interact with society...that's why I'm smelling a health issue.

I'm not worried about Claude and the media right now. He gets a pass. He has never spoke for the team as a whole before, some are better than others at it. It will be a work in progress. I would also like to point out, Mike RIchards was young like Claude when named Captain, but he had a wealth of experience to draw from. He was a Captain for 7 different teams before being named Flyers Captain....including being Captain of high profile teams like the Canada Under 18 and the Canada World Juniors team. That is quite a vast body of work to draw from. Of course Claude is a work in progress, it's totally expected to have some growing pains.

I think some posters that are calling out Claude will feel a bit silly when it's all said and done. I'm not impressed with Claudes play right now, but let's put it into perspective here, he has had a poor start to the first quarter of a strike shortened season. He can and will turn it around.

[ruxpin]

Rux... i am calm but seriously why on earth do we compare G to Richards? Fine, they are both/were captains but for heavens sake it is pretty early in Girouxs captaincy to say he is being Richard-esque.

He called out his teammates and he should... frankly, this team sucks right now and it starts with G. Kimmo and Briere said the same thing so i guess they are being richards or carter-esque too? No offense and i tend to agree but i think many people look for a story where there is none.

They are simply not that good...

Hi murray. Glad to hear you're calm. Sorry, throw-away line that didn't belong.

I don't mean to keep hammering at this because overall I agree with what you've said to me and in other posts on this thread. I just want to clarify that I said the postgame interview was Richards-esque.

You've been around long enough to know (and others will testify) that I hated Richards. I just simply never liked him. So for me to compare Giroux in anyway to Richards runs the risk of the assumption I'm insulting Giroux. I think it's a justified assumption by whomever wants to make it, but in this case--just to clarify--my observation was strictly limited to that interview.

It was more than simply trying to compare Giroux's "style" in the interview with that of Richards. The comparison was really as much about the similarity of the situation--in some respects--regarding the way the team is playing.

Richards' team was lethargic, disjointed, seemingly disinterested at times, and after sleepwalk games the best the young captain could muster was a series of canned cliches about working together, pulling weight, focus, etc. Now poor Giroux, in his first year, is on a team that appears lethargic, disjointed, seemingly disinterested at times, and after sleepwalk games the best the young captain can muster is a series of canned cliches about working together, pulling weight, focus, etc.

Thus, the reference to Richards-esque. Just that postgame brought back some deja vu for me.

The comparison stops there, though. I don't mean to insult Giroux--I have no idea what else the kid is supposed to say there. He could get more specific and call out individual players, but I don't think that's a good idea and would likely be extremely counterproductive. He could be Richards-esque in other ways and seem to be combative with the interviewer(s). He wasn't, and shouldn't be.

Brelic made the comparison to Pronger. I understand the comparison being made there, but I think the aspects he highlighted are the difference between a confident 35 year old and a 25 year old still trying--naturally--to feel his way through an entirely new experience. If I understand Brelic correctly, he's not faulting Giroux for this but just saying the confident, seasoned, 35 year old is what we need as captain. I think this is a fairly good point. But, we have Giroux, and I think (hope) he is going to continue to grow into his role. Otherwise, the front office has repeated the mistake IT made with Richards and gave a promising young kid too much too soon.

I just wanted to clarify that my comparison wasn't "I hate Richards, and this bozo is just like him." It's just that in that postgame, it brought back memories of both the style and situation of some of Richards' postgames.

[radoran]

"I don't know who you're putting out there but I want that first shift."

Kind of hard to factor in a statement like that and reconcile it with your view isn't it? To me anybody who says that to their HC - and then goes out and delivers (in a huge way) is a born leader. But I don't base my opinion on that one comment alone. I'm saying that one comment suggests he's said all sorts of "leadership-type" things that haven't been reported.

I think that it is the difference between being a competitor and a leader.

Giroux is a top flight competitor. How that translates to leadership is another question.

Lead by example works to an extent. But it is not about being motivated, it is about motivating others.

[brelic]

"I don't know who you're putting out there but I want that first shift."

Kind of hard to factor in a statement like that and reconcile it with your view isn't it? To me anybody who says that to their HC - and then goes out and delivers (in a huge way) is a born leader. But I don't base my opinion on that one comment alone. I'm saying that one comment suggests he's said all sorts of "leadership-type" things that haven't been reported.

It's a good point, and one I never disputed. On the ice, Giroux has the goods (though the jury is out so far this year). He has the skills and the confidence behind it to be an elite level player. But you're quoting something he told the head coach.. and good on him for delivering. That was a huge momentum boost for the Flyers. The hit, the goal, he was riled up for sure.

What does he tell his teammates when they're down? What does he tell them when they're up? What does he do when players are playing like individuals? How does he foster a sense of team? A sense of pride? A sense of doing whatever it will take to win? That's what leaders can do. And maybe Giroux will (can? is?) that type of leader. All I was suggesting is that from all the stuff I have ever heard him say publicly, he doesn't sound like one. I have no idea what goes on behind closed doors. But Pronger walked and talked like a leader. Giroux, well, from what I have seen, does not so far.