Goaltending was the difference, again.

[brelic]

What have Derek Morris and Adrian Aucoin ever won?

Oh, right. Nothing.

Moving along...

Oh, wait, I'm sorry. That's right. Aucoin won the Babe Pratt Trophy as the best defenseman on the (23-47-12) 1998-99 Vancouver Canucks.

Well, he's got that going for him.

You don't need to win anything to be able to recognize bad teammates. Richards is a great player. Is he a great teammate? Didn't seem that way in his last year here. I'm sure more than a few people on this team realized that as well. Which is why he's gone.

I'm not quite sure what point you're trying to make: that Aucoin and Morris' opinions are null and void because they haven't won anything? Or that Bryz is a good teammate despite what they say? Or that it doesn't matter what kind of teammate he is, as long as he brings it on the ice?

[radoran]

You don't need to win anything to be able to recognize bad teammates. Richards is a great player. Is he a great teammate? Didn't seem that way in his last year here. I'm sure more than a few people on this team realized that as well. Which is why he's gone.

I'm not quite sure what point you're trying to make: that Aucoin and Morris' opinions are null and void because they haven't won anything? Or that Bryz is a good teammate despite what they say? Or that it doesn't matter what kind of teammate he is, as long as he brings it on the ice?

I'm not saying Bryz "is" or "is not" a good teammate.

My point is that if I'm going to listen to anybody about it, Derek Morris and Adrian Aucoin aren't at the top of that list. Boston unloaded Morris in the March before what was going to be a serious Cup run before the Flyers derailed it in historic fashion. If Morris is such a "great teammate" why did the Bruins decide they'd rather have a conditional 4th on the bench with them instead of him?

And we'll just let Aucoin polish that Babe Pratt trophy a little longer. Guy hasn't been on a winning team. Ever. Signed a four year deal with Chicago and this "great team guy" was shipped off to Calgary after two years for a guy who played the grand sum of a half a season in Chicago.

Two pieces of sh!t swirling in the bowl as it empties...

Bryz is gone from Phoenix because the Coyotes dont have an owner who can make serious personnel decisions and the Flyers offered a) value for an asset that was about to leave anyway and B) a contract that Phoenix wasn't going to (in fact "couldn't") match.

And I refuse to make "good/bad teammate" judgements based on how HBO edits a show together for entertainment value. This isn't a "documentary" - this is a "reality show." If it's not entertaining, people don't watch.

Hell, HBO focused on Avery for the Rangers early on. That should tell you enough about how "real" the 24/7 is...

[brelic]

I'm not saying Bryz "is" or "is not" a good teammate.

My point is that if I'm going to listen to anybody about it, Derek Morris and Adrian Aucoin aren't at the top of that list. Boston unloaded Morris in the March before what was going to be a serious Cup run before the Flyers derailed it in historic fashion. If Morris is such a "great teammate" why did the Bruins decide they'd rather have a conditional 4th on the bench with them instead of him?

And we'll just let Aucoin polish that Babe Pratt trophy a little longer. Guy hasn't been on a winning team. Ever. Signed a four year deal with Chicago and this "great team guy" was shipped off to Calgary after two years for a guy who played the grand sum of a half a season in Chicago.

Two pieces of sh!t swirling in the bowl as it empties...

Bryz is gone from Phoenix because the Coyotes dont have an owner who can make serious personnel decisions and the Flyers offered a) value for an asset that was about to leave anyway and B) a contract that Phoenix wasn't going to (in fact "couldn't") match.

And I refuse to make "good/bad teammate" judgements based on how HBO edits a show together for entertainment value. This isn't a "documentary" - this is a "reality show." If it's not entertaining, people don't watch.

Hell, HBO focused on Avery for the Rangers early on. That should tell you enough about how "real" the 24/7 is...

Fair enough. But you don't need fancy HBO editing to see the essence of Bryz's personality. And it wasn't just in that show. He threw his teammates under the bus after a recent loss, and his quotes were to the beat writers, not HBO.

Again, my original post didn't say he was or was not a good teammate, only that when you start to take all these things together, you see a pattern emerging, and maybe there was some truth behind what Morris and Aucoin were saying.

In any group of 20 guys, you are going to have some mild personalities and some strong ones. Some will be eccentric and some will be boring. And it's not about how we, as fans, are affected by those personalities. I don't know any of them personally; only what I read and see on teevee. But what is important is how those personalities affect teammates. Just like a coach who throws his players under the bus in the media will have a very short shelf life, teammates who do the same will find themselves strangely alone when they need someone to cover their back.

tl;dr - It will be a long 9 years if Bryz's eccentricities have a negative effect on his mates.

[Mad Dog]

They didn't go about it the wrong way, they just went with the wrong terms on the deal.

I disagree, Vince. Like Rad said, their strategy seemed to target the next best goalie available. They did it almost just to be able to check that box off of their list of things they had to do this summer. I am sure Snider wanted to land a good, high-quality goaltender and address this problem once for all. Unfortunately, there really *wasn’t* that type of a goalie last summer. Bryz proved very little in his career that he is capable of carrying the team far and be the “savior” most perceived/anticipated he would be. Nothing in his play or numbers showed otherwise.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Mad Dog

[Flyguys03]

Flyers:

1) Still would have needed four to win

2) Gave up two momentum-shifting goals - one 30 seconds after taking a commanding 2-0 lead

3) Still left Brad Richards wide open for the GWG (that would be Giroux's man on that play)

In the end, "Bob" didn't make a damn bit of difference.

If the Flyers don't cover their men and leave all-stars open for wide open shots, it doesn't matter who's in goal.

Also, "Brodeur" isn't "in the heads" of any of these Flyers - they don't have that history with the Devils. None of them.

"Brodeur" - and "Lundqvist is the new Brodeur" - is in the heads of fans. Henrik is a great goalie. No question. He can be beat.

Go beat him.

Bob and his two bad goals didn't make a bit of difference? Um...ok.

[aziz]

Bob and his two bad goals didn't make a bit of difference? Um...ok.

wait, two bad goals now? the one under his arm shortside, absolutely. which other one was bad?

[Vincent05]

I can fault them for thinking "whoever is the bext UFA goalie available rightnow" is automatically "the answer to our decades-long goalie problem."

The universe - no matter how big it really is - doesn't alter itself to fix whatever problems the Flyers want to address "rightnow."

Again, they need a PLAN to address their situation in goal. It's not a problem a "quick fix" will solve. And Bryz was the quick and easy answer.

How's that working out for them?

We wouldn't have this problem if Bryz was playing like he suppose to. I'm not supporting the signing but have to make do with what we got now. Everyone's more angry because we have to deal with this BS for another 8 years along with the NMC. The majority would be fine if it was a 3 year deal which gives us a better chance to get out of it and to develope Bob along. Yes Ed Snider and/or the Flyers management rushed into signing the best available free agents but I don't recall anyone having a problem with it in years past. I'm piss as you are but what can we do?

[brelic]

We wouldn't have this problem if Bryz was playing like he suppose to. I'm not supporting the signing but have to make do with what we got now. Everyone's more angry because we have to deal with this BS for another 8 years along with the NMC. The majority would be fine if it was a 3 year deal which gives us a better chance to get out of it and to develope Bob along. Yes Ed Snider and/or the Flyers management rushed into signing the best available free agents but I don't recall anyone having a problem with it in years past. I'm piss as you are but what can we do?

We can all stare at your avatar to make us feel better.

[radoran]

Bob and his two bad goals didn't make a bit of difference? Um...ok.

If the "difference" is between "what Bryz would have done" and "what Bob did" then, no. No difference. (in my humble opinion)

Was the second "bad" goal and then the defensive lapse leaving Richards alone near the dot for the game winner the difference in the game? Yes.

Ergo, the "goalie change" didn't really change anything.

Q.E.D.

Clear(er)?

[radoran]

We wouldn't have this problem if Bryz was playing like he suppose to. I'm not supporting the signing but have to make do with what we got now.

I've been in the "make due with what we've got" camp for quite a while now. Founding member, practically. Welcome aboard! :-)

We now return you to the "Play Bob And Fix Everything!" Show on hockeyblogs.net

Today's episode: "How It Really Wasn't Bob's Fault"

[Vincent05]

I disagree, Vince. Like Rad said, their strategy seemed to target the next best goalie available. They did it almost just to be able to check that box off of their list of things they had to do this summer. I am sure Snider wanted to land a good, high-quality goaltender and address this problem once for all. Unfortunately, there really *wasn’t* that type of a goalie last summer. Bryz proved very little in his career that he is capable of carrying the team far and be the “savior” most perceived/anticipated he would be. Nothing in his play or numbers showed otherwise.

I agree that there wasn't a high quality goalie available but what are the chances of one being available? No team is going to let one walk free, Bryz isn't that bad but he was the best there is that we can sign unless we trade a arm and a leg for a Lundqvist or a Rinne and I highly doubt their team would give them up. It all comes down to Bryz turning it around soon and be who we expect him to be. Like I said on the above post, we are really piss because of the term of the deal, that makes it more big of a deal then it really is.

[aziz]

If the "difference" is between "what Bryz would have done" and "what Bob did" then, no. No difference. (in my humble opinion)

tough to say, though, isn't it? who knows what bryzgalov would have done? the play we've seen out of him for the last month, i call it 50-50 a few of those scramble plays end up in the net and it's 4-2 going into the third.

end result would've been the same, rangers win, but then the end result would've been the same had *i* been in goal for the flyers yesterday. that isn't the most detailed way of measuring a goalie's performance.

[radoran]

tough to say, though, isn't it? who knows what bryzgalov would have done? the play we've seen out of him for the last month, i call it 50-50 a few of those scramble plays end up in the net and it's 4-2 going into the third.

end result would've been the same, rangers win, but then the end result would've been the same had *i* been in goal for the flyers yesterday. that isn't the most detailed way of measuring a goalie's performance.

I'm using the criteria developed on these very boards:

1) make it so the Flyers "don't have to score four goals every game" to have a chance to win

2) no "momentum-changing goals"

3) no "bad goals"

3-2 means they would have needed to score four to win.

giving up a goal 30 seconds after going up 2-0 in the second in a game your team is "dominating" and then another less than three minutes into the third to tie it up? Seems "momentum-changing" to me.

Rupp's second goal would be the poster child for "bad goal" if Michael Leighton had never strapped on pads.

[Vincent05]

We can all stare at your avatar to make us feel better.

Glad I can help somehow.

I've been in the "make due with what we've got" camp for quite a while now. Founding member, practically. Welcome aboard! :-)

We now return you to the "Play Bob And Fix Everything!" Show on hockeyblogs.net

Today's episode: "How It Really Wasn't Bob's Fault"

Glad to be welcome onto the bandwagon. It's more like "what's the excuse today."

[Flyguys03]

wait, two bad goals now? the one under his arm shortside, absolutely. which other one was bad?

The first one was borderline bad. But not entirely his fault. The 2nd was bad because of timing and softness. Even absolving him of 1 and 3, the 2nd one was brutal and should never have happened.

[Flyguys03]

If the "difference" is between "what Bryz would have done" and "what Bob did" then, no. No difference. (in my humble opinion)

Was the second "bad" goal and then the defensive lapse leaving Richards alone near the dot for the game winner the difference in the game? Yes.

Ergo, the "goalie change" didn't really change anything.

Q.E.D.

Clear(er)?

Oh, didn't know you were talking about the goalie change. Yes, they would have lost with Bryz too. So we agree.

[aziz]

I'm using the criteria developed on these very boards:

1) make it so the Flyers "don't have to score four goals every game" to have a chance to win

2) no "momentum-changing goals"

3) no "bad goals"

3-2 means they would have needed to score four to win.

i mean, ok, you aren't wrong....but that is a good bit of box score reviewing, isn't it? there were several instances in yesterday's game where i am not the least bit confident that bryzgalov would have made the stops that bob did. yes, the several check boxes were, well, checked, but there's a reality beneath the criteria. in the end, the flyers were down by a goal with an opportunity to tie it late....had a couple more scramble plays in the 1st and 2nd ended up on the scoreboard, that is no longer the case.

don't get me wrong. that second goal was inexcuseable. the first one less so, though i would've liked bob to have taken a stride towards an uncreative shooter with no passing options. the third, well, what are you going to do but close your eyes and hope? he made two saves from 8 inches out on players who were goalside of their defenders, and the second one squirted to an allstar whose checker was splitting the difference and out of position.

i know you know all of this; i don't mean to come across all lecture-y. just saying bob gave the team a real chance to win the game and they didn't. he also caused his share of the drama on the second goal, but the pentultimate bottom line is he kept them in it when i'm not sure bryzgalov would have. the bottom bottom line, obviously, is he lost. there is detail there, though.

[radoran]

Glad to be welcome onto the bandwagon. It's more like "what's the excuse today."

It's more like an Occupy encampment, but smells better.

I'm so sick of the excuses, I'm bursting.

[radoran]

@aziz

Saw the whole game start to finish.

No point in playing the "what if" game about this shot here or that stop there.

I just know beyondashadowofadoubt that I can guarandamntee if Bryz had been in net and EXACTLY the same things had happened in the game, the focus would ALL be on "why does Bryz suck so much" instead of "well, it really wasn't Bob's fault - except maybe that second one."

Again, the point is that THERE ARE PROBLEMS BEYOND GOALTENDING - many of which will, in fact, make the goaltending look better no matter what number follows "3" on the jersey between the pipes.

[DaGreatGazoo]

would've liked bob to have taken a stride towards an uncreative shooter

Aziz..you're a goalie, right? Explain this to me...and not to be negative towards Bob, just an observation. The 2 "knocks" I remember hearing on Bob last year where: 1-he played too deep in his net and 2-he had a tendency to make himself "small" in the net-even for a butterfly style goalie.

In watching him this year, I still see those 2 things happen regularly every game he plays. Not saying it's easy to change something you've been doing most of your life, but would you think Reese would have been able to make some improvements to Bob by now?

Again, not crushing either one on those issues, but asking legit question..

[Podein25]

....no matter what number follows "3"

Duh, everybody knows that "4" follows "3" - have you been hanging out with Special K or what?

jk

[brelic]

@aziz

Saw the whole game start to finish.

No point in playing the "what if" game about this shot here or that stop there.

I just know beyondashadowofadoubt that I can guarandamntee if Bryz had been in net and EXACTLY the same things had happened in the game, the focus would ALL be on "why does Bryz suck so much" instead of "well, it really wasn't Bob's fault - except maybe that second one."

Again, the point is that THERE ARE PROBLEMS BEYOND GOALTENDING - many of which will, in fact, make the goaltending look better no matter what number follows "3" on the jersey between the pipes.

Bryz is held to a different standard, as he should be. Bob did not have a good game yesterday. That backbreaking goal let them back in the game. But there is less focus on Bob because a) he is supposed to be the backup; B) it is his 2nd year playing professional hockey in North America, and c) he doesn't have the same level of expectations placed upon him.

I'm more upset with Giroux blowing that coverage than if it were, say, Read or Couturier. Giroux should know better; the other two are still learning. Doesn't make it right, just makes it more 'acceptable'.

I completely agree that there are problems beyond goaltending. The players are responsible too. Even if you concede that, at any given time, there are anywhere from 5 to 7 rookies in our lineup (Read, Couturier, Schenn, Rinaldo, Z, Bourdon, Marshall, Sestito, Gustafsson, Holmstrom), and they are bound to experience some growing pains, I see an offensive-minded team. That's going to mean getting burned more often than, say, the Rangers or the Bruins.

What are the options?

New goaltender won't happen. Neither will a new coach.

[aziz]

No point in playing the "what if" game about this shot here or that stop there.

of course, but the what-if does have implications for who i think the better guy to go with for the rest of the season goes.

I just know beyondashadowofadoubt that I can guarandamntee if Bryz had been in net and EXACTLY the same things had happened in the game, the focus would ALL be on "why does Bryz suck so much" instead of "well, it really wasn't Bob's fault - except maybe that second one."

because he has made a habit of being terrible recently. held up against bryzgalov over the last 12 games or so, yesterday would have counted as a good outing. yes: bad goalie loses and the game is put on his back while not-bad goalie loses and people look for other explanations. it isn't fair, but there it is. i try to call it like i see it, and as i see it bob gave the flyers better than i think they would have gotten from bryzgalov.

Again, the point is that THERE ARE PROBLEMS BEYOND GOALTENDING - many of which will, in fact, make the goaltending look better no matter what number follows "3" on the jersey between the pipes.

no disagreement there, but that doesn't make the topic irrelevant. when one goalie has made floaters from the halfwall the scariest moments of the night, he is going to get piled on. bob had a miss and a half yesterday, but, frankly, that's an improvement.

[aziz]

In watching him this year, I still see those 2 things happen regularly every game he plays. Not saying it's easy to change something you've been doing most of your life, but would you think Reese would have been able to make some improvements to Bob by now?

yeah. i agree. then again, as i said to HF earlier in the season, practice only accomplishes so much. an NHL goalie who doesn't see game time isn't going to get better. game situations are where things are learned. all the coaching in the world gets a guy nowhere if he sits for two weeks between starts. more games = bob getting sharper. less games = falling back on bad habits when he does finally get the nod.

[radoran]

yeah. i agree. then again, as i said to HF earlier in the season, practice only accomplishes so much. an NHL goalie who doesn't see game time isn't going to get better. game situations are where things are learned. all the coaching in the world gets a guy nowhere if he sits for two weeks between starts. more games = bob getting sharper. less games = falling back on bad habits when he does finally get the nod.

Which is exactly why they are forced to play Bryzgalov for most of the starts. Your nine-year $51M NMC investment isn't going to get better sitting on the bench.

Again, the decision that was made - not necessarily the decision WE would have made...