Claude (the one year wonder) Giroux

[King Knut]

Thank you.

This is why when people talk about no one on this team being safe and trading them all except Simmonds and Mason, my mind is blown.

I don't know about best player in the world, but there are very few if any players I would rather have on my team than Claude Giroux. Certainly on offense anyway.

A healthy Stamkos can score from anywhere and Crosby has great hands and vision, but Claude is just one hell of an all around player who will crash and bang, create opportunities, but most importantly he's truly becoming one of those guys who can see the play before it happens. He seems to create the scoring chance five, six moves away. He's like a Chess master.

By which point he may not even be getting an assist or may have even gone off the ice for a change, but the pass he makes or the defender he draws off or the hole he opens up or the loose puck or whatever. He's an incredibly fun player to watch.

What's with this guy? Why does he wear the C?

Since Dec 11 he's barely scored more than anyone else in the entire NHL. Other than he's good on faceoffs, throws bodychecks, kills penalties, makes incredible passes and dangles and has a deadly accurate shot I really don't see anything impressive about him. So what he's now 4th overall in NHL scoring and only 4 points out of 2nd...the guy should have been playing great to start the season, injured wrist or not. it's not like his hands matter to his style of play. If only we'd had a shot at Sanguinetti.

[fanaticV3.0]

Exactly. It would be nice, for example, if the captain of the team and the engine that makes it go had stats we could cite "from the beginning of the season" instead of "since this arbitrary point I've chosen in order to be able to make this statement." Because, honestly, "fourth in the league in points since the beginning of the season" isn't such a bad thing.

 

But, the slow starts are an issue. This year he had six points in his first 11 games (3-8). Last year - when he had no "wrist problem" to "explain" it - he had seven in the first 11 (4-7).

 

I made this point in another thread, but even two more early season wins puts them in a Much Different Position in the playoff chase. They'd be seven points up over the 8 seed instead of three and may not need - to take VanFlyers' point about the schedule - to play .600 hockey in the toughest part of the schedule.

 

To their credit, they've worked hard to put themselves in a position to overcome the slow start this year, but the slow start last year killed them. If there's another slow start next season you're not looking at a few outliers, you've got yourself a definite trend.

 

I don't understand why this is even an issue. He played poorly and was criticized. He's playing well now and is being praised. I don't see anything wrong with either, especially when you account for his two sub-par starts the last two seasons. It's not like people are lying about that.

[Adamflyers]

I don't understand why this is even an issue. He played poorly and was criticized. He's playing well now and is being praised. I don't see anything wrong with either, especially when you account for his two sub-par starts the last two seasons. It's not like people are lying about that.

I think this entire thread was more directed at the people who were ready to strip him of the C or ship him out of town after the poor start.  I 100% agree with the notion of criticizing when a player is playing poorly and praising when they are playing well.  It is one thing to get on a guy who is not playing well, but it is another to declare him no longer useful to the team and say that he needs to be shipped off.  I think those are the people FC is most poking fun at. 

 

One thing I can't stand is blind praise for players simply because they are on your team.  If they are playing poorly, they should hear about it. 

[flyercanuck]

@Adamflyers

 

 We were all disappointed at the Flyers start, and specifically Girouxs. I was poking fun at all of us. He deserved the scorn but the guy has picked his game up and played like one of the best, so i just thought I'd throw that in everyones face...and noone in particular. I think most of you guys have caught on that I tend to be a sarcastic bastard at times.

[pilldoc]

It's not flip flopping if what is being said about him is actually true though. He was playing like crap in the beginning of this year and it was the second year in a row he did that. Calling him out for that is in no way, shape, or form wrong.

 

 

I think this entire thread was more directed at the people who were ready to strip him of the C or ship him out of town after the poor start.  I 100% agree with the notion of criticizing when a player is playing poorly and praising when they are playing well.  It is one thing to get on a guy who is not playing well, but it is another to declare him no longer useful to the team and say that he needs to be shipped off.  I think those are the people FC is most poking fun at. 

 

One thing I can't stand is blind praise for players simply because they are on your team.  If they are playing poorly, they should hear about it. 

 

That is exactly how I feel.  He was playing poorly and I called him out on it.  Now that he is playing well...all is good.......

[Adamflyers]

@Adamflyers

 

 We were all disappointed at the Flyers start, and specifically Girouxs. I was poking fun at all of us. The guy has picked his game up and played like one of the best, so i just thought I'd throw that in everyones face...and noone in particular.

Jeez, I try to come to your defense and you prove me wrong! haha  I def don't mind the normal, run of the mill fan complaints about or top player who was dreadful to start the seaosn, but I def have a problem with the sky is falling people who wanted to run the guy out of town. 

 

But now I find you were poking fun at all of us...well screw you then!

[Mad Dog]

I don't understand why this is even an issue. He played poorly and was criticized. He's playing well now and is being praised.

 

Because the point is, he was experiencing the effects of the injuries from the past year / pre-season. And his injuries start welling up to the surface only now – typical of how the Flyers handle things around these parts… If he was 100% healthy to start the season, then yes, I would agree that he deserved a fair criticism. But if he was hurting, I don't know why it would be unfair to admit now that perhaps some of the earlier criticism was unjustified.

 

I guess the only thing I will say to this is if.... IF... he was in fact not 100% healthy, he should’ve pulled himself out of the lineup.  Only the player knows his body, his pain threshold, and how his injuries affect his performance.  This aspect is hard to quantify and there are more variables in this, which is why this part belongs in a different conversation.

[flyercanuck]

@Adamflyers

 

 Thanks Adam....and FU too!

[brelic]

I don't understand why this is even an issue. He played poorly and was criticized. He's playing well now and is being praised. I don't see anything wrong with either, especially when you account for his two sub-par starts the last two seasons. It's not like people are lying about that.

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any player or any team that does not have ups and downs, slumps and streaks. Crosby basically had two excellent months, and then 4 months of subpar production (for his standards). Those two months were October and December, and he has been in decline since then. Same with Kessel (excellent months, subpar months). Same with Giroux.

Same with the Pens, the Leafs, the Flyers, the Kings. There are only two or three teams that have been extremely consistent this year, and the Blues are one of them. It seems pretty clear that the Flyers are not on the same level as the Blues, Hawks, and Ducks. They are the elite teams of the league.

So, with that being said, Giroux seems to be ramping up at the right time. It's not an arbitrary point in time to look at things - it is understanding that the season will have ups and downs, and that Giroux's streak has lasted a long time and he has been instrumental in bringing the Flyers to where they are now.

[radoran]

So, with that being said, Giroux seems to be ramping up at the right time. It's not an arbitrary point in time to look at things - it is understanding that the season will have ups and downs, and that Giroux's streak has lasted a long time and he has been instrumental in bringing the Flyers to where they are now.

I used the "arbitrary" and it was specifically because of the "December 11" reference to his production. That's a completely arbitrary time frame designed to make him the "most productive" since then. Why not December 10? Or December 13? Or November 29th?

 

He doesn't need that - he's fourth in the league in scoring even with his bad start.

 

But the point about two consecutive bad starts to years - and the subsequent holes dug - remain valid and last year had nothing to do with injury and the player and the team claim that this year wasn't a result of injury either.

[brelic]

radoran, on 18 Mar 2014 - 11:46 AM, said:

I used the "arbitrary" and it was specifically because of the "December 11" reference to his production. That's a completely arbitrary time frame designed to make him the "most productive" since then. Why not December 10? Or December 13? Or November 29th?

Any date outside of the first game of the season is arbitrary. It sounds like you disagree because you doubt the motives of the reporter(s) who use that date as a measuring stick, which happens to show Giroux at the top of the standings in that stretch.

The way I view it is that Giroux has been the league's top point getter since that cold day in December. That represents the majority of the season so far. That's a remarkable accomplishment for any player.

It's also important for the Flyers because it's happening now. If Giroux were the top point getter from October to December, I doubt we would be as interested. Much like Mason was incredible in October. That's great, but the Mason and Giroux of today are what's important to the team and fans.

[fanaticV3.0]

Because the point is, he was experiencing the effects of the injuries from the past year / pre-season. And his injuries start welling up to the surface only now – typical of how the Flyers handle things around these parts… If he was 100% healthy to start the season, then yes, I would agree that he deserved a fair criticism. But if he was hurting, I don't know why it would be unfair to admit now that perhaps some of the earlier criticism was unjustified.

 

I guess the only thing I will say to this is if.... IF... he was in fact not 100% healthy, he should’ve pulled himself out of the lineup.  Only the player knows his body, his pain threshold, and how his injuries affect his performance.  This aspect is hard to quantify and there are more variables in this, which is why this part belongs in a different conversation.

 

If you are healthy enough to play you're healthy enough to be criticized. If your injuries are affecting your productivity, you shouldn't be playing.

 

This is the 2nd year in a row he's had a slow start too.

[fanaticV3.0]

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any player or any team that does not have ups and downs, slumps and streaks. Crosby basically had two excellent months, and then 4 months of subpar production (for his standards). Those two months were October and December, and he has been in decline since then. Same with Kessel (excellent months, subpar months). Same with Giroux.

Same with the Pens, the Leafs, the Flyers, the Kings. There are only two or three teams that have been extremely consistent this year, and the Blues are one of them. It seems pretty clear that the Flyers are not on the same level as the Blues, Hawks, and Ducks. They are the elite teams of the league.

So, with that being said, Giroux seems to be ramping up at the right time. It's not an arbitrary point in time to look at things - it is understanding that the season will have ups and downs, and that Giroux's streak has lasted a long time and he has been instrumental in bringing the Flyers to where they are now.

 

Which is why I take issue with the premise of the thread. He was playing poorly at the beginning of the year and was criticized. He is playing great now and is being praised for it. I don't have a problem with either.

 

If we've got nothing better to talk about than how some people's opinions of Giroux in the beginning of the year were not flattering - especially when true - we all need to get a life.

[fanaticV3.0]

I think this entire thread was more directed at the people who were ready to strip him of the C or ship him out of town after the poor start.  I 100% agree with the notion of criticizing when a player is playing poorly and praising when they are playing well.  It is one thing to get on a guy who is not playing well, but it is another to declare him no longer useful to the team and say that he needs to be shipped off.  I think those are the people FC is most poking fun at. 

 

One thing I can't stand is blind praise for players simply because they are on your team.  If they are playing poorly, they should hear about it. 

 

He was given the captaincy for no other reason than being the face of the franchise. It wasn't based on experience or merit. Taking that into considering, after his 2nd slow start, I don't have a problem with people questioning his captaincy. Now they should know realistically they're never going to strip him of the C that soon, but that doesn't mean it can't be discussed or thought about. So people wanted him stripped of the C? So what? He's playing great now and this is what we're talking about? This is lame.

[brelic]

Which is why I take issue with the premise of the thread. He was playing poorly at the beginning of the year and was criticized. He is playing great now and is being praised for it. I don't have a problem with either.

 

If we've got nothing better to talk about than how some people's opinions of Giroux in the beginning of the year were not flattering - especially when true - we all need to get a life.

Just to be clear, I wasn't disputing your point. You just happened to be the last post in the thread

[fanaticV3.0]

Just to be clear, I wasn't disputing your point. You just happened to be the last post in the thread

 

Lazy ass

 

Is that even the right emoticon? It's not nearly as friendly looking as it should be.

Edited March 18, 2014 by fanaticV3.0

[King Knut]

I disagree with this notion that a player shouldn't be out there if he's not 100%.

 

Especially at the start of the season.  If you're injured and still better than other guys, AND you're not going to make things worse by playing, then you play.

 

If you'll make a minor injury a major injury by shooting yourself up with Cortisone that sucks calcium out of your bones and causes catastrophic hip bone failure (looking at you Rayzor) then it might have been better to let your leg heal through rest.  Hell you might have been healthy by the finals and we might have won a cup... but I digress.

 

Claude maybe had some issues to start, sure but if playing wasn't going to cause a more serious injury or slow his recovery, then how's playing him a bad thing? Because he's not a superstar and just a great player?  Meh.  Was playng McGinn over Giroux because G's finger wasn't better yet really the way to go?

 

I doubt it.  Even then I would have said so.  When I called for stripping his C it was because I was dumb enough to think the responsibilities and pressure of being a captain were distracting him from being a play maker.  Boy was I wrong.

 

 

Because the point is, he was experiencing the effects of the injuries from the past year / pre-season. And his injuries start welling up to the surface only now – typical of how the Flyers handle things around these parts… If he was 100% healthy to start the season, then yes, I would agree that he deserved a fair criticism. But if he was hurting, I don't know why it would be unfair to admit now that perhaps some of the earlier criticism was unjustified.
 

I guess the only thing I will say to this is if.... IF... he was in fact not 100% healthy, he should’ve pulled himself out of the lineup.  Only the player knows his body, his pain threshold, and how his injuries affect his performance.  This aspect is hard to quantify and there are more variables in this, which is why this part belongs in a different conversation.

[King Knut]

I think last year's slow start was due 100% to the fact that there was no Jagr to make things look easier for him.

 

Plain and simple.  The responsibility was all on him. 

 

This year, sure Danny B was gone and his hand was hurt, but the there was something horrifically off with that whole team at the start of this season.  Honestly, I still couldn't tell you what it was.  It wasn't Lavvy.  I'm pretty sure of that and Homer even suggested as much.  The change benefited the team, but I don't think it's because Berube's a genius.  He may relate to them better, he may have some ideas they can put into action, but I don't think Chief is the next Scotty Bowman.

 

Whatever the problem was, the solution seemed to be Claude figuring out how to be the captain.  Was it Rayzor beating the hell out of Holtby?  Was it that friendly note from Mike Richards?  Who knows... something just clicked in Claude and he hasn't looked back.  I myself chalk it up to that 3-0 loss to the Devils.  Wasn't that the one where he didn't talk to the press and everyone here got pissy about it?  Something switched over in him after that game (which was a truly truly pathetic game).  The next game was the Edmonton game when he got his first goal of the season and he honestly looked like a different player entirely.  like he woke up from a fog and was once again Claude Giroux.

 

He was crashing and banging and throwing the body and making plays.  It's not uncommon for a plyer in a slump to break out in a big way after a long drought, but what happened to Claude was a breakout of a different Stripe.  Overnight he became the captain this team had been lacking and that quite honestly, I personally wasn't sure he could ever become.

 

But the point about two consecutive bad starts to years - and the subsequent holes dug - remain valid and last year had nothing to do with injury and the player and the team claim that this year wasn't a result of injury either.

[brelic]

Lazy ass

 

Is that even the right emoticon? It's not nearly as friendly looking as it should be.

Bah, I was just piggy backing on your thoughts.

Not the greatest emoticons, huh? I wonder how difficult it is to get a bunch more added in.

[radoran]

Any date outside of the first game of the season is arbitrary. It sounds like you disagree because you doubt the motives of the reporter(s) who use that date as a measuring stick, which happens to show Giroux at the top of the standings in that stretch.

The way I view it is that Giroux has been the league's top point getter since that cold day in December. That represents the majority of the season so far. That's a remarkable accomplishment for any player.

It's also important for the Flyers because it's happening now. If Giroux were the top point getter from October to December, I doubt we would be as interested. Much like Mason was incredible in October. That's great, but the Mason and Giroux of today are what's important to the team and fans.

 

I acknowledge earlier in the thread the improvement of Giroux's game over the season and the importance of it coming when it did and the fact that it is important that he's playing at or near the top of his game rightnow.

 

Fourth in the league in scoring overall is a heckuvan accomplishment for any player.

 

The reason they use that date is that in the week prior Giroux had two points in three games and Crosby had five in four. Again, an arbitrary date chosen specifically to be able to make the statement.

 

When someone is deliberately skewing numbers to create an artificial distinction, I have little patience for it. A full season means guys are playing - barring injury - the same number of games (or at least had an opportunity to play the same number of games). Crosby played 32 games prior to December 11. Giroux played 30. Both have played 67 this season. That means - to this point - Giroux has played more games since December 11. Again, not something that gets pointed out in the rush to cite an arbitrary stat.

 

If someone was saying the same thing about Crosby, I can guarantee you there would be more people on here pointing out the deficiencies in the stat assertion.

 

In the end, it reeks - to me - of making excuses. And - to me - a player who is fourth in the league in scoring doesn't need excuses.

 

Again - over the weekend Simmonds had as many points as Giroux and had two goals to Giroux's zero. What does that mean? Not much - certainly not that Simmonds is "as good" as Giroux or, quite frankly, even comparable.

 

Crobsy had 21 points in October. Giroux had six. And the Pens were 9-4 and the Flyers were 3-8. That 12 points represent the main reason the Pens are 15 points up on the Flyers rightnow and the Flyers are two points from being out of the playoffs (with two games in hand).

 

And those 15 points player-to-player are a large part of the 19-point difference between Giroux and Crosby this season.

[mojo1917]

He was given the captaincy for no other reason than being the face of the franchise. It wasn't based on experience or merit.

 

while it is odd that a guy that had never been a captain as a hockey player was given the opportunity at the game's highest level, i disagree that it was without merit.

 

He (Giroux) was the guy that lifted his teammates 2 years ago, not Timmonen , not Briere, not Jagr.... Giroux was the guy that snapped his stick over the cross bar at the end of the game 5 vs Pgh and provided the spark that everyone in the building fed off of during the game 6 rout.  The fans ate it up and i bet the old man did too.

 

There might have been more "deserving " guys in the locker room to be named captain with the Pronger injury but the team clearly responded to Claude His compete level and his play that season in a tangible & visceral way. 

 

When he was going poorly no one stepped in  and picked up the slack on the ice, he's the straw that stirs the drink . He needed to learn that and then apply it to how he plays, it took a while but it seems as though if he's healthy he'll be the player we hoped he would be.

[Polaris922]

An outsider's view? Wasn't injury. I think Laviolette was an easy coach and your entire team's conditioning and work ethic was horrible. Once Berube made changes to that, everything else returned to where it had been.

Other than that...

[Vanflyer]

There might have been more "deserving " guys in the locker room to be named captain with the Pronger injury but the team clearly responded to Claude His compete level and his play that season in a tangible & visceral way. 
 

 

Nice post. To add to that, if you watch him in post games interviews- is smart, articulate and matter of fact. Additionally, if you hear / read what his teammates say about him, its all you need to know. I will take G as C 7 days a week and twice on Sunday over Richards (and his 39 points / -2: Brayden Schenn and Wayne Simmonds are smirking at him). What a lopsided trade!!!! 

[radoran]

An outsider's view? Wasn't injury. I think Laviolette was an easy coach and your entire team's conditioning and work ethic was horrible. Once Berube made changes to that, everything else returned to where it had been.

 

I kinda lean in this direction.

 

Except that it "hadn't been" before

[Polaris922]

I kinda lean in this direction.

Except that it "hadn't been" before

I'll clarify then... Where it had been when they were winning two seasons ago.