King Knut Posted January 18, 2017 Author Share Posted January 18, 2017 12 hours ago, radoran said: I still maintain making Richards captain at that point was a terrible mistake. It was all part of the Flyers culture of trying to declare so ething before it happened. And their failure to adequately address the problems - assuming they were aware of them. Because the team gave DECADE long deals to both players. Seems an odd situation for an organization that was aware of serious problems with the social lives of the two guys. They pilloried and drove Eric Lindros out of town for less... The main problem is that no matter how much we can differ on the percentage of incompetence to the percentage of ignorance, it doesn't end well for the organization. And I use that term loosely. In the end, it wasn't a good decision, but I honestly don't see it as a huge problem. Frankly, it's difficult for me to question the wisdom of the decisions at the time that resulted in what was in fact a much more successful team. Gagne, Briere or Kimmo should have been made captain to start the season after they traded Forsberg. I don't think it was as much of a "terrible" mistake as you do, but if they thought Richards was going to be a captain someday, they could have just given it to Gagne assuming he'd be out after his contract expired in a few years anyway. I see what they were thinking because young captains like Crosby were being handed the reigns elsewhere (and let's face it, Crosby was a captain in name only for a long time just as McDavid is now) but I can see what they were thinking. "we have these two young kids who we think hold greatness, let's roll with it." It wasn't the wisest move. The Penguins and today's Oilers have absolutely nothing to lose. The Penguins of that era were in grave danger of being shipped out of town. It was a hail mary. They got some help from the league, but it worked. The Oilers are trying the same thing though I assume they're a little safer in Edmonton. Even so, I don't think the Richards captaincy was a huge problem. They were certainly more successful with Richards as Captain than they have been with Giroux as their captain. They never missed the playoffs with Richards as Captain. They made it to the ECFs their first year with him as captain. They had a tendency to only lose to the team that would win the cup (or at least the one that went to the finals) in those years. I tend to agree with you about their contracts too. If these guys has such terrible problems that everyone was aware of, why were they given such mammoth RFA deals? Richards' came first, but from what everyone here says, the problems were apparent from the start. Even if they weren't, Carter's came a few months before they traded him supposedly because his behavior was so awful. Doesn't make sense. Not even for Homer who was the King of not making sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 32 minutes ago, King Knut said: Even so, I don't think the Richards captaincy was a huge problem. They were certainly more successful with Richards as Captain than they have been with Giroux as their captain. They never missed the playoffs with Richards as Captain. They made it to the ECFs their first year with him as captain. They had a tendency to only lose to the team that would win the cup (or at least the one that went to the finals) in those years. I'm more referring to Richards' development and place on the team than anything else. As for the team, they were still dealing with the "chasing the dragon" approach. Richards was put into a position where he was essentially forced to deal with the media - which he had never been particularly good at and bristled at openly. That didn't help temper the media's position, either as the jackals and sharks simply swarmed more intensely. A different captain - Gagne/Briere/Timonen - would have been in a much better place in that scenario. The latter two had already been captains of teams and Gagne was an obvious fan favorite (but had only played 25 games in 07-08 and that likely spooked the organization). For that matter, one can look at the whole revolving door that the captaincy became with Hatcher/Forsberg/Smith as a problem for the organization in terms of consistency. In some respects, the real "problem" was making Smith the captain for 07-08. IIRC, they were "hoping" that Smith would take the captaincy and be the "interim" guy they were looking for. When he left anyway, they reverted to the "Next Bobby Clarke" who then managed all of three seasons before he "had" to be traded. The team, while it did lose three straight times to Cup champions, had a first round exit against the Pens that wasn't exactly close then almost missed the playoffs before coming up with the run to the Final and then were swept in the second round by the Bruins. Following that, the team experienced the fallout of the #homercoaster - with Pronger getting injured after they paid a king's ransom for him and Bryzgalov flaming out spectacularly after he restructured the entire team to put him in the crease. 32 minutes ago, King Knut said: I tend to agree with you about their contracts too. If these guys has such terrible problems that everyone was aware of, why were they given such mammoth RFA deals? Richards' came first, but from what everyone here says, the problems were apparent from the start. Even if they weren't, Carter's came a few months before they traded him supposedly because his behavior was so awful. Doesn't make sense. Not even for Homer who was the King of not making sense. This is where the "conventional wisdom" clashes with reality. And, again, it doesn't reflect well on the organization as a whole no matter how you look at it. Either they were asleep at the switch or the made a huge commitment to players knowing that there were serious flaws. In the end, Mike Richards was preordained to be "the Next Bobby Clarke" from the moment he was drafted and the organization did everything they could to make that prediction come to pass right up until they shipped "the Next Bobby Clarke" to Los Angeles. That's where I come to the conclusion it was a "terrible" mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 19, 2017 Author Share Posted January 19, 2017 23 hours ago, radoran said: This is where the "conventional wisdom" clashes with reality. And, again, it doesn't reflect well on the organization as a whole no matter how you look at it. Either they were asleep at the switch or the made a huge commitment to players knowing that there were serious flaws. In the end, Mike Richards was preordained to be "the Next Bobby Clarke" from the moment he was drafted and the organization did everything they could to make that prediction come to pass right up until they shipped "the Next Bobby Clarke" to Los Angeles. That's where I come to the conclusion it was a "terrible" mistake. I really wish we could stop looking for the "next ______" and just use the players for what they are and help them to be as great as they can be. I think Hextall's trying. Frankly, if Clarke then Homer couldn't get Richards and Carter under control that really seems a bit silly to me. If things were half as bad as everyone claims, then team rules were certainly broken on a fairly regular basis. And if they weren't, create some new team rules and bench the suckers. What on earth could it have mattered in 2007-2008 when expectations were so low after the worst season in Franchise history? nip it in the friggin' bud. there's no excuse to not do it. And then this is where someone chimes in with claims of "personal responsibility" which is valid, but it ignores the fact that by 2007 it was Homer's ship and he had a G.D. professional responsibility to the organization and to the fans (and I believe to the players themselves) to right this damn ship. Maybe the organization anointed them the "next whatevers" but that means that the organization can damn well un-anoint them too. Richards and Carter may have had a responsibility to themselves and the team, but Homer, Stevens and Lavvy all had a responsibility as well and if (as it's supposed) Lavvy tried and it made the punks bristle, then it's Homer's job to step the hell in and put them in their place. But instead Homer did a classic white male passive aggressive avoidance maneuver and traded them helping everyone but himself in the process. The whole thing was played poorly by everyone. I love Jake, Coots & Simmer and clearly Richards' broke down physically and spiraled into a pain meds problem as a result that was probably enabled by what had already exhibited itself as an addictive personality... but let's face it, 5 years later, this team still isn't any better for it. They'e only achieved less since the trades. Meanwhile 5 years later, the Kings have two cups and the Blue Jackets are demonstrably in first place DESPITE getting screwed in the Carter deals. It just doesn't look good for the Flyer point of view no matter how you slice it. It looks "meh" at best. There are a great many reasons for this and there are a great many reasons to hope it's improving, but to say the whole affair wasn't a complete clusterf*** is short sighted and it sounds like you agree. maybe there was no good way out, I don't know. I do know the path taken was a poor one. Worked out for the Kings in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 21 minutes ago, King Knut said: The whole thing was played poorly by everyone. I love Jake, Coots & Simmer and clearly Richards' broke down physically and spiraled into a pain meds problem as a result that was probably enabled by what had already exhibited itself as an addictive personality... Richards spent the entire 08-09 season on pain medication so he could play hockey for the Flyers. The entire season. And then had surgery on both shoulders immediately after the Flyers' season ended. He certainly had a role in the "spiral into a pain meds problem" but I think there's ample evidence that the swirl began long before Los Angeles and that the Flyers organization almost certainly wasn't doing much to help. In fact, I'll wager the pressure on the newly-minted Captain to be on the ice and playing in 08-09 was immense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 19, 2017 Author Share Posted January 19, 2017 7 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said: The Horse ain't dead, it's just overdosing on pain meds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.