Don't Look Now, But the Kids Are Getting It Done.

[flyercanuck]

How long have I been saying the same thing? Everytime our gm brings in a Pronger, a Briere, a Bryzgalov, I just wince.

Why run to the playoffs when you can walk to a championship? We're ALWAYS running. The Carter/Richards trades are exactly the opposite of what we're used to seeing. So was the Coburn trade years ago. It's so much more enjoyable watching a player come along on Philly (even with the painful growing lessons) than seeing him do it on another team while the piece you received for him retired a decade ago.

Of course, nothing is guaranteed.

[radoran]

Briere is indicative of the problem. Signing him to that deal and that length - with the terms involved (high salary decreasing over time) - was meant to have him as an important cog at the start ("The #1 C") and then the "saavvy vet" by the end of the deal.

Then they junked that whole plan.

The Flyers seem to come up with long term plans every 2-3 years and junk the previous long term plan.

Hard to believe that strategy hasn't worked, eh?

[flyercanuck]

@radoran

Truly hard to believe rad.

And if Homer doesn't rush into the Briere lottery, and make a bunch of other for the now trades, we could very well have Stamkos,Doughty or Pietrangelo instead of say Timonen. May not have helped us as much over the first few years, but we never won anyway. And NOW we'd have another good great young piece to the puzzle.

[AndyS]

@radoran

Truly hard to believe rad.

And if Homer doesn't rush into the Briere lottery, and make a bunch of other for the now trades, we could very well have Stamkos,Doughty or Pietrangelo instead of say Timonen. May not have helped us as much over the first few years, but we never won anyway. And NOW we'd have another good great young piece to the puzzle.

I still think the Briere signing was a very good move. If not for perhaps the worst goal-tending performance in Finals history, we win the Cup in 2010 & Briere is hands-down the Conn Smythe winner.

Some of the other moves? Yeah, not so much.

[radoran]

I still think the Briere signing was a very good move. If not for perhaps the worst goal-tending performance in Finals history, we win the Cup in 2010 & Briere is hands-down the Conn Smythe winner.

Some of the other moves? Yeah, not so much.

My only quibble with the Briere signing at the time was the "need" to sign one of the three "#1 Cs" - Briere, Drury, Gomez.

It was another example of the Flyers identifying a need and then plugging, literally, the first thing they found into the hole.

Was Briere the best of the three rightthen? Absolutely. Was he the best for the Flyers overall? Debateable.

Take the Williams-for-Markov move. Was that a move that "needed" to be made? That year? Sure. For the long term? Williams has two Cups, Markov wasn't even re-signed.

Now we see threads here already about "what move to make?" to get to the playoffs this year. Is getting to the playoffs this year more important that developing a Cup winning team?

For the Flyers, maybe. For me? No.

[flyercanuck]

@AndyS

But we didn't win. And these are the types of moves that always keep us competetive, but never good enough to win a cup. Briere has been good for a few years. Now, not so much. But a player like Stamkos/Pietrangelo/Doughty can help your team compete for well over a decade. They are all as good or better than what we have at that position. And none of them has reached their prime yet. Meanwhile Briere is overpriced and fading away.

But there was no way in heck Philly could suck for TWO years in a row.

[canoli]

Now we see threads here already about "what move to make?" to get to the playoffs this year. Is getting to the playoffs this year more important that developing a Cup winning team?

well just to play Devil's Advocate for a moment....

we probably shouldn't dismiss that strategy completely, or pretend it's brought us nothing. A few times we've come closer than anyone but the Cup-winner and that is not "nothing." Most NHL clubs can't say the same...most of them have never been runner-up.

The year we traded all those picks + Sbisa for Pronger many of you said "What fools we be!" trading away youth for an aging veteran who's best days were behind him. So what happens? Pronger comes in and between him and a few lucky breaks we make it to Game 6 of the Stanley Cup Final. Was Pronger responsible, by himself? Of course not. But does anyone think we make it that far without him?

"We didn't win." That's true. We also didn't sit and watch the POs like [eventually] 28 other teams did that year. And who can forget that 2010 run? The crazy way we got in, the Flyers' winning a SO? Boosh beating Lundqvist? Whipping the Devils 4-1 then going down 0-3 to Boston, the Big Comeback that is now in the history books...with Michael Leighton of all people stepping in to wrap up the series for the Flyers.

Sure the memory would be even better if we'd won the Cup - obviously. But it's still one of the best 3 months of Flyers' hockey I've ever seen...and my memory goes back a long way.

My only point is - crazyshit happens in the POs and you have to be in them to have a shot. I don't like "going for it" every year at the expense of developing a team...but it has brought us some memorable runs. I only mentioned the most recent but there have been others.

[flyercanuck]

@canoli

Playoffs are always fun to watch. The problem is, when you always go for it, you're constantly giving up players who have a lot more in front of them for guys who don't have much left. Even bringing in Briere and Timonen and Hartnell which only cost us a 1st rounder possibly also cost us the right to draft Stamkos or Doughty or Pietrangelo. Right now, what would you rather have, that cup run or one of those 3?

[canoli]

Right now, what would you rather have, that cup run or one of those 3?

I know...that's why i said I was "playing DA for a moment." But your question isn't necessarily cut n dry. Not to me anyway. I mean think about that 2010 run for a minute, it was flat-out fkn incredible wasn't it? Even non-hockey fans were amazed by what the Flyers did. Would I trade that SO win, that Miracle Comeback, that Game 6...all for one player, even if it is Steven Stamkos?

;;;pause;;;;

I guess I would. Because let's face it Stamkos or Doughty, Piet - they all buy you many more years of possible "awesome, history-making" PO runs. AND we don't have the weight of Pronger's contract or Briere's...certainly not Bryzgalov's.

but that PO run was a helluva lot of fun!

[radoran]

@canoli

I obviously appreciate devil's advocacy.

But, to me, the goal is to win the Cup. Playoffs are nice. Cup Finals are thrilling.

Winning the Cup is the goal. Less than that, quite frankly, is failure.

Literally half the league has won Cups since the Flyers' last won. Only nine teams haven't made the Final and of those only the Blues and Leafs have been in the league as long or longer than the Flyers.

Seven teams that weren't even in the league when the Flyers last won have won Cups.

The Blues had a 25-year run of making the playoffs and never won the Cup. The Leafs famously haven't won in a league with more than six teams.

The Flyers' "plan" has gotten two Finals appearances in the past 20 years. The only other team that have two or more Finals appearances in the past 20 years without winning the Cup is Vancouver.

Not exactly exalted company.

[AJgoal]

The Flyers could have ended up dead last with first pick in that draft and it wouldn't have mattered.

Stamkos would have been drafted by Washington. Steve Eminger says hi.

[canoli]

look Pal don't try to confuse me with the fact alright? I'm sicka facts!

but seriously folks..."

Winning the Cup is the goal. Less than that, quite frankly, is failure."

I guess this is where I jump ship. I don't think that's "the goal" for me and my fan interest. My "goal" is to enjoy the games as they happen. The more of them I get in a season from my fav team the more I enjoy that season. I enjoy Flyers' wins more than Flyers' losses (as a rule, though there are plenty of exceptions) so naturally I want my Flyers to have the best players, the best coaches available...etc.

Winning the Cup, going to the parade...the bragging rights at work, at the rink...that's all great and Flyers' fans have been deprived of that over the last 40-odd years. But we haven't "suffered" without it have we? Have you? I think of MadDog when this topic comes up because he thinks like you - the goal is to win the Cup and anything short of that is a Big Fail. I disagree - or, I don't think that way I should say. For me every season has had ups and downs and the best seasons were the longest seasons, the ones we've gone the deepest in the POs. Winning the Cup will be incredible when it happens but it won't suddenly change anything about how I enjoy Flyers' games. The following year they'll be on the ice, competing for points and the privilege to play for the Cup that's all. We'll have the memory of the Cup-win, true...but really how much better or sweeter will it be than the 2010 run? For me not much. A bit, but not a whole lot.

[radoran]

The Flyers' stated goal - over and over - is to be "good enough to compete for the Stanley Cup."

Again, I described the Finals as "thrilling" and the playoffs as "great."

But the playoffs and the Finals are there for one reason and one reason only - to win the Cup.

Is St. Louis pleased as punch with 25 consecutive playoff appearances and no Cup? Is that "success?"

The Flyers use the Cup as their measuring stick. So I use the measure they use.

[canoli]

Oh I hear ya - but I think you're confusing the Flyers' goal with the fans' goal. At least this fan's goal...mine. Maybe yours really is "winning the Cup" but it's hard for me to understand why. Unless you're invested in the Flyers financially or are actually playing or coaching for them...I don't really get it. I mean I do...of course I do. We all wanna win the Stanley Cup and tell our Caps' fan brother-in-law to GFY! But other than the bragging rights...I honestly don't know what changes whether we're Cup winners or not.

Imagine Leaky Leighton doesn't let Kane score from a 90-degree angle. Imagine we go to Chi and WIN THE STANLEY CUP!!!! We have the parade down Broad St and the Flyers are in the history books as the 2009-2010 Stanley Cup Champions.

What exactly has changed for you today? Are you any less worried about the Flyers current situation? Are you more hopeful they can repeat the performance this year or next year?

[edit: I'm grasping at straws because I really don't know...I can't imagine how your life would be better or even different if the Flyers had won the Cup that year.]

Edited February 27, 2013 by canoli

[flyercanuck]

The Flyers could have ended up dead last with first pick in that draft and it wouldn't have mattered.

Stamkos would have been drafted by Washington. Steve Eminger says hi.

Well this is all hypothetical discussion with the idea Philly management wasn't in the "win now" mentality 24/7/365. We would have held onto the pick.

[canoli]

So to bring it back to the topic at hand - I do believe the "kids are getting it done." They haven't failed because the team is under .500. Jake is tearing up the opposition. Read was leading the team in goals. Schenn is turning himself into a power forward before our eyes. His brother Luke is making big stops and dealing out the pain in the process. Harry, the little we've seen of him looks like he'll eventually have a place in the NHL.

etc.

[radoran]

Really does depend on your definition of "it"

That said, I do not want - as a team or a fan - to watch a team go out and have "productive" players that don't, you know, win hockey games.

[canoli]

haha! yeah..."productive" sorta kinda has to mean winning.

But in all seriousness for young players winning shifts is fine by me. If they win enough of them over the course of a game...and there aren't more than one or two "passengers" that night (and our goalie doesn't have his head in his ass) then the Flyers will certainly win more games.

[AndyS]

So to bring it back to the topic at hand - I do believe the "kids are getting it done." They haven't failed because the team is under .500. Jake is tearing up the opposition. Read was leading the team in goals. Schenn is turning himself into a power forward before our eyes. His brother Luke is making big stops and dealing out the pain in the process. Harry, the little we've seen of him looks like he'll eventually have a place in the NHL.

etc.

Now find a way to pry Jonathan Bernier from LA's hands and watch as the Flyers enjoy a long run of playoff seasons and finally winning the Cup(s) in the near future. This team is just plain awful in one area - goalie. Used to be a strength (Bernie, Pelle, even Hextall). Over the last 20 years? Not so much.

I like Bryz. I think he's the best we've had in a long time (which isn't saying much, I know). But it's about time we either developed a franchise goalie or plucked one from another team.

If I'm Homer, I'm burning up the phone lines with Lombardi & Hextall and not hanging up until we have a deal in place that lands us Bernier.

[flyercanuck]

@AndyS

The only thing is, what makes Bernier a franchise goalie? He;s played 50 odd games, has a 2.41 gaa and .912 save percentage on a defensively minded team. On Laviolettes wide open system, that isn't going to translate any better than what we have (though it would be cheaper, money-wise and more expensive player-wise)

And at 6 feet and a buck eighty-five, he's not exactly the gi-normous goalie that everyone seems to be going to these days.

Edited February 28, 2013 by flyercanuck

[canoli]

@AndyS

Yeah like FC says I'm not sure what elevates Bernier to "franchise-goalie" status - or even "potential franchise-goalie" status.

In any case I'm afraid there's just something in the Flyers gene pool that forbids developing a goaltender. Say we get Bernier and he shows some promise...but then falls a little flat toward the end of the season and in the POs... What do you think the Flyers will do with him? [hint: see Bob]

I just have zero confidence the Flyers' management will give a young goalie the time required to prove his worth, i.e. to truly evaluate him.

So we're stuck with "pluck[ing] one from another team" as you said. But here our track record is even worse. Marty Biron...Michael Leighton...Jeff Hackett...Beezer... Maybe they all don't qualify as "plucking from another team" since not all were got in trades but I think it's safe to say We Suck at finding goaltenders.

[JackStraw]

This team is just plain awful in one area - goalie

The defense ain't so hot either.

[AndyS]

@AndyS

The only thing is, what makes Bernier a franchise goalie? He;s played 50 odd games, has a 2.41 gaa and .912 save percentage on a defensively minded team. On Laviolettes wide open system, that isn't going to translate any better than what we have (though it would be cheaper, money-wise and more expensive player-wise)

And at 6 feet and a buck eighty-five, he's not exactly the gi-normous goalie that everyone seems to be going to these days.

Al I know is that every time I see him play (and I get to see a lot of the Kings games), he impresses me. He is cat-quick laterally, and he stays big in the net (i.e. stays upright in the net). If there is one thing that has consistently driven me nuts about our goalies in recent years, it's their mind-numbingly stupid habit of dropping down low the second the other team brings the puck into the offensive zone. I'll never understand it.

I think Bernier is a lock to be a future franchise goalie.

Plus, we could all chant, "Ber-nie! Ber-nie!"

[flyercanuck]

Don't get me wrong, I like the guy. Just not sure I'm ready to sell the farm on him.

[Mad Dog]

Don't get me wrong, I like the guy. Just not sure I'm ready to sell the farm on him.

Something tells me that at the very least, he won't be worse than Bryz. And most importantly, I highly doubt he will command Bryzgalov's contract. On second thought, knowing the Flyers, they'll find a way to do something criminally stupid when it comes to signing players to contracts.