Congrats Preds and Lavvy!

[King Knut]

1 minute ago, radoran said:

 

The problem was he got away from his own plan.

 

 

Agreed.  To me he didn't lose the Richards and Carter trades when he traded them, he lost those trades when he signed Bryzgalov with their cap space.  They were rebuild moves to reposition the team around Giroux, but Bryzgalov was a "Damn the Torpedos" move designed to screw up the cap space for a decade in the hopes of a few more runs at a cup... without the players that got you there. 

 

Signing Jagr for next to nothing was inspired.  Letting him walk after he CLEARLY was the reason Giroux had a career year was utterly moronic.

 

Trading JVR for Luke Schenn because he didn't like JVR's effort?  Moronic.

Trying to catch lightning in a bottle twice and signing VLC probably to replace Jagr... moronic.  Because WE KNEW WHAT VLC had been doing.  Jagr had been in the KHL and no one knew what he'd do when he came back.  It was a gamble.  WE KNEW THE GAME VLC had been playing and it GOT HIM BOUGHT OUT.  And then we have Bob.  Let's not even talk about Bob.  Let's just all agree that what happened with Bob was so far much much much worse than signing AMac to a bad contract that it's not even worth saying anything more about it.  

 

Ever again. 

 

Let's NEVER talk about Bob again.  

 

 

[radoran]

4 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

Agreed.  To me he didn't lose the Richards and Carter trades when he traded them, he lost those trades when he signed Bryzgalov with their cap space.  They were rebuild moves to reposition the team around Giroux, but Bryzgalov was a "Damn the Torpedos" move designed to screw up the cap space for a decade in the hopes of a few more runs at a cup... without the players that got you there.

 

Not get too far into the weeds here, but the plan wasn't to build the team around Giroux.

The "plan" (IMO) was to build the team around Pronger. That's why they signed him to the seven year deal.

 

Oddly enough, "building a team" around a 35-year-old defenceman didn't work out. And then they had to reposition everything around Giroux, having already signed The Goalie Who Shall Not Be Named.

 

#homercoaster

 

Homer was never going to go into "rebuild" mode because the franchise's founder and guiding light was desperate for "another Cup."

[King Knut]

2 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

To me it all started with his handling of the goalies in that Sabre series...and it just went down hill from there...then losing to the Devils...then when he was finally shown the door he just didn't have the players who could skate in his system...

 

Hartnell - Giroux - Voracek
Schenn - Lecavalier - Simmonds
Talbot - Couturier - Read
Rosehill - Hall - Rinaldo

 

Timonen - Schenn
Coburn - Streit
Grossmann - Meszaros

 

..so it was easier to just fire the coach than ALL of the players...the biggest problem was his replacement was just rearranging the chairs on the titanic....Lavy just had to many sloths to run his system it was his issue it was Homer's...but most of us here all know this. Here is a good read on it from today.

 

http://www.broadstreethockey.com/2017/5/23/15680388/peter-laviolette-flyers-predators-fired-hindsight

 

Bottom line is that is way behind them and now they need to continue the course they are currently on. The farm is in the best shape i have ever seen. They just need to figure a few things out for next year....most notably who will be the main man in the crease.

 

I agree on the Sabres series, because wasn't it playing Bob in that series that put him over the limit that meant he couldn't play in the AHL the following year?   But I also put that on Homer a little bit.  Homer provides the roster.  He could have told Lavvy, "tough.  you can't have Bob.  It'll screw up the cap and I'll have to trade him. make it work with Boosh."  

 

Boosh was playing just fine in that series.  The goalie wasn't the problem... as evidenced by playing Bob and almost the EXACT same thing happened, except NOW, bob had to be on the NHL roster the next year.

 

Of course Homer could have figured out another way to keep Bob.  He couldn't unload ANY other player?  Short of Giroux at that point, was there another player you'd have held onto more than Bob?  He was still a little green, but it was clear what he had.  

 

 

 

[King Knut]

Just now, radoran said:

 

Not get too far into the weeds here, but the plan wasn't to build the team around Giroux.

The "plan" (IMO) was to build the team around Pronger. That's why they signed him to the seven year deal.

 

Oddly enough, "building a team" around a 35-year-old defenceman didn't work out. And then they had to reposition everything around Giroux, having already signed The Goalie Who Shall Not Be Named.

 

#homercoaster

 

Homer was never going to go into "rebuild" mode because the franchise's founder and guiding light was desperate for "another Cup."

 

Who said the plan was to build around Pronger?  Because they traded the kids that Pronger hated and who were between him and a captaincy?  Pronger was excellent, but he was a whiney bee-yatch about a lot of stuff.  He made the team better, but I'm not sure he helped the team dynamic at all.

 

In any event, certainly the offense was being built around Giroux.  

[OccamsRazor]

2 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

I agree on the Sabres series, because wasn't it playing Bob in that series that put him over the limit that meant he couldn't play in the AHL the following year?   But I also put that on Homer a little bit.  Homer provides the roster.  He could have told Lavvy, "tough.  you can't have Bob.  It'll screw up the cap and I'll have to trade him. make it work with Boosh."  

 

Boosh was playing just fine in that series.  The goalie wasn't the problem... as evidenced by playing Bob and almost the EXACT same thing happened, except NOW, bob had to be on the NHL roster the next year.

 

Of course Homer could have figured out another way to keep Bob.  He couldn't unload ANY other player?  Short of Giroux at that point, was there another player you'd have held onto more than Bob?  He was still a little green, but it was clear what he had.  

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah but it was the yo yoing i was talking about. Boosch then Bob then Michael F**king Leighton????

 

He should have had the conviction to stick with Bob or Boosh....and this was one of the nails in the coffin and it is what pissed Snider off to say go out and land a starter....which lead to Bryzaster!!!

 

I wasn't refering to the cap implications and contract part of that.

[OccamsRazor]

3 minutes ago, King Knut said:

Because they traded the kids that Pronger hated and who were between him and a captaincy?  

 

 

They traded picks and Sbisa who has been just serviceable at best.

 

Pronger was a good choice no one could have for saw what happen to his eye. Sure the money cap issue was a big deal but he was a great leader. Water under the bridge i guess.

[radoran]

7 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

Who said the plan was to build around Pronger?  Because they traded the kids that Pronger hated and who were between him and a captaincy?  Pronger was excellent, but he was a whiney bee-yatch about a lot of stuff.  He made the team better, but I'm not sure he helped the team dynamic at all.

 

In any event, certainly the offense was being built around Giroux.  

 

IMO, when you trade essentially three first round picks for a player, trade away your own home grown core, sign that player to a seven year deal (paying him $7M+ for the first four years) and hand him the captaincy (not Giroux) you are "building around" that player.

 

The plan IMO was clearly to make the Flyers "Pronger's team" (which had been something of a wet dream of many in the Flyers' brass for a decade).

 

As for "building around Giroux" those results unfortunately have spoken for themselves for the past five years*...

 

 

* to be perfectly clear it's not entirely Giroux's "fault"

[King Knut]

4 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

Yeah but it was the yo yoing i was talking about. Boosch then Bob then Michael F**king Leighton????

 

He should have had the conviction to stick with Bob or Boosh....and this was one of the nails in the coffin and it is what pissed Snider off to say go out and land a starter....which lead to Bryzaster!!!

 

I wasn't refering to the cap implications and contract part of that.

 

The yo yoing was stupid.  I agree.  for the reasons I stated above.  The goalie wasn't the problem.  Boosh was getting it done fine.  The Flyers couldn't solve the Sabres D.  It was as simple as that.  They were controlling rebounds and were getting destroyed in their own zone, they simply couldn't get decent shots or passes in the Sabres zone.  

 

The cap implications were where Homer should have stepped in, but the guy couldn't ever see past the next 20 minutes of hockey.

 

[King Knut]

2 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

IMO, when you trade essentially three first round picks for a player, sign that player to a seven year deal (paying him $7M+ for the first four years) and hand him the captaincy (not Giroux) you are "building around" that player.

 

The plan IMO was clearly to make the Flyers "Pronger's team" (which had been something of a wet dream of many in the Flyers' brass for a decade).

 

As for "building around Giroux" those results unfortunately have spoken for themselves for the past five years*...

 

 

* to be perfectly clear it's not entirely Giroux's "fault"

 

I think there's a difference between handing the team's leadership over to a guy and building it around him, especially a D man.  Maybe you can build around a D man like Karlsson or Subban a little bit, but Pronger was more of an Anchor than a guy who defines the play on the ice.  And I don't mean anchor like Chris Therien was an anchor.  I mean he held stuff in place and kept things together.  

 

I still think if they'd just resigned Jagr, the last 5 years would be a totally different story.  No cups probably.  The Defense was too old, broken and weak after Pronger went down and the goalies too mediocre for that.  But I think if Jagr (and Laviolette) stick around we're looking at a totally different progression of Claude Giroux (and probably IMHO Voracek and Couturier as well... Schenn's path has been speckled and complicated all on it's own). 

[OccamsRazor]

4 minutes ago, King Knut said:

Boosh was getting it done fine.

 

 

Yeah i guess he was ok.

 

They could have used some better play from the goalie.

 

But the problem is he wasn't on the team then so yeah they could have stuck with Boosh.

 

Bob just wasn't ready yet. (and with hindsight he still doesn't play well come playoff time to this day). They should have never played Leighton should have went down with Boosh.

 

Then they ran into a Bruins team who was healthy and looking for revenge!!! And was just better overall and especially in net!

 

It was Nodl's fault!!!! 

[radoran]

1 minute ago, King Knut said:

I still think if they'd just resigned Jagr, the last 5 years would be a totally different story. 

 

 

If you go back on this board and check out my posts you'll see that I believe "not reloading the gun" after 11-12 was a tragic, irrevocable mistake.

 

And it also demonstrates quite clearly that this franchise never "needed" Chris Pronger.

[OccamsRazor]

13 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

IMO, when you trade essentially three first round picks for a player, trade away your own home grown core, sign that player to a seven year deal (paying him $7M+ for the first four years) and hand him the captaincy (not Giroux) you are "building around" that player.

 

The plan IMO was clearly to make the Flyers "Pronger's team" (which had been something of a wet dream of many in the Flyers' brass for a decade).

 

As for "building around Giroux" those results unfortunately have spoken for themselves for the past five years*...

 

 

* to be perfectly clear it's not entirely Giroux's "fault"

 

 

 I wouldn't say they were building around Pronger they were just wanting the leadership from him that Richie wasn't providing...they wanted him to lead the core they were building for a lack of a better word...the problem was Homer didn't know how to build a team besides wheeling and dealing picks away....he didn't have the patience it required to do it the right way so he set the organization back half a decade or more.

 

But i guess it was the thought that count???

 

[OccamsRazor]

3 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

 

If you go back on this board and check out my posts you'll see that I believe "not reloading the gun" after 11-12 was a tragic, irrevocable mistake.

 

And it also demonstrates quite clearly that this franchise never "needed" Chris Pronger.

 

 

Yes they should have jettisoned Lilja and GrossmanN and added some better Dmen and have at it again.

 

They lost some close game to the Devils and Lavy could counter the Devil's plan to take advantage of the Flyers having no right handed Dmen (which lead to the Schenn trade like it or not)...another nail in Lavy's coffin!

[radoran]

1 minute ago, OccamsRazor said:

 I wouldn't say they were building around Pronger they were just wanting the leadership from him that Richie wasn't providing...they wanted him to lead the core they were building for a lack of a better word...the problem was Homer didn't know how to build a team besides wheeling and dealing picks away....he didn't have the patience it required to do it the right way so he set the organization back half a decade or more.

 

Is there another example of a franchise trading away three first round picks for a player, then trading away their own home grown core and then signing the traded-for player to a seven-year deal paying him $7M+ for four years and, as you note, asking him to provide the "leadership" for the franchise and have that mean the franchise is not "building around" that player?

 

I'm not saying they were expecting Pronger to be the lynchpin of the entire offense (although they were clearly hoping he would be the 50+ point player he had been and, likely, to be a significant part of the power play).

 

I'm saying they intended the franchise to be "Pronger's team" not "Giroux's team".

[OccamsRazor]

2 minutes ago, radoran said:

I'm saying they intended the franchise to be "Pronger's team" not "Giroux's team".

 

Yeah that was then plan i'm sure to give G a better example of how a Captain is suppose to be. And Pronger did just that. However the eye injury derailed then plan greatly and instead of handing it to Kimmo the gave it to Giroux. That was one of their biggest mistakes too....the C was handed to him before he was ready.

[radoran]

5 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

Yeah that was then plan i'm sure to give G a better example of how a Captain is suppose to be. And Pronger did just that. However the eye injury derailed then plan greatly and instead of handing it to Kimmo the gave it to Giroux. That was one of their biggest mistakes too....the C was handed to him before he was ready.

 

Going further down the rabbit hole, they should have given Timonen the C instead of Jason Smith.

 

 

[King Knut]

7 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

Yeah i guess he was ok.

 

They could have used some better play from the goalie.

 

But the problem is he wasn't on the team then so yeah they could have stuck with Boosh.

 

Bob just wasn't ready yet. (and with hindsight he still doesn't play well come playoff time to this day). They should have never played Leighton should have went down with Boosh.

 

Then they ran into a Bruins team who was healthy and looking for revenge!!! And was just better overall and especially in net!

 

It was Nodl's fault!!!! 

 

 

If we're talking about the same series, in

 

Game 1 They started Bob (and in doing so if I remember correctly, ruined his status for the AHL the next season).  stopped 30 of 31 shots.  But the Flyers couldn't score, so they lost 1-0.

Game 2 Bob gave up 3 goals on 7 shots. So Boosh then finished the game stopping 20 of 21 shots and the Flyers won 5-4.   

Gmae 3 Boosh stops 35 of 37 shots and the Flyers win.  

Game 4 Boosh stops 30 of 31 shots again and the Flyers lose 1-0 (again).  

Game 5 Boosh has a bad start and give up 3 goals on 11 shots.  Leighton comes in and saves 20 of 21, but the Flyers lose.  

Game 6, Leighton gets the start and gives up 3 goals on 8 shots, Boosh comes in relief stopping 24 of 25.  

Game 7 Boosh starts and saves 26 or 28 and the Flyers move on to face the Bruins.  

 

I'm not sure how you get much better goaltending than that from Boosh.  He outplayed the far better goalie on the other end of the ice.  He had one bad start, but Ryan Miller who was one of the premiere goalies in the league at the time gave up 5 goals in three different games and 4 goals in another game.  

 

Laviolette should not have been given the option of starting Bob in game 1, but even after that, it was Lavvy's obsession with Leighton that just made no sense.  

 

Maybe I'm getting it wrong and it was the Bruins series when Bob overplayed his limit?  Can someone help out?  

The Bruins series, they were just completely outmatched.  Boston was out for blood after the 2010 embarrassment against the flyers and they would go on to win the damn cup that year, so I can't really fault anyone for getting beat that series.  

 

 

 

 

[King Knut]

11 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

Is there another example of a franchise trading away three first round picks for a player, then trading away their own home grown core and then signing the traded-for player to a seven-year deal paying him $7M+ for four years and, as you note, asking him to provide the "leadership" for the franchise and have that mean the franchise is not "building around" that player?

 

I'm not saying they were expecting Pronger to be the lynchpin of the entire offense (although they were clearly hoping he would be the 50+ point player he had been and, likely, to be a significant part of the power play).

 

I'm saying they intended the franchise to be "Pronger's team" not "Giroux's team".

 

Well let me put it this way.  If Homer thought he could trade away the core of the offense for a handful of magic beans and two prospects that wouldn't even be NHL ready for at least 2 years (Schenn and Coots beat the odds by making the team--or did Homer have NO choice but to play them?) and considered that building a team around a 35 year old D-man, he was even dumber than I thought.

 

Homer did not put together a "win now" team.  Plain and simple.  He had a win now Captain in Pronger and supporting D squad and a win now space cadet goalie, but he had a couple of over the hill forwards and a bunch of players who had never played in the NHL or were thought to have some "potential".

[King Knut]

7 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

Going further down the rabbit hole, they should have given Timonen the C instead of Jason Smith.

 

 

 

Sure.  Not sure it would have changed anything other than that everyone here could stop saying "They gave Richards the captaincy too soon!"  

 

Richards as captain got farther than any captain since Dave Poulin and Clarke before him.  If that's getting it too soon, all Flyers captains should be so lucky.  

[radoran]

1 minute ago, King Knut said:

 

Well let me put it this way.  If Homer thought he could trade away the core of the offense for a handful of magic beans and two prospects that wouldn't even be NHL ready for at least 2 years (Schenn and Coots beat the odds by making the team--or did Homer have NO choice but to play them?) and considered that building a team around a 35 year old D-man, he was even dumber than I thought.

 

Homer did not put together a "win now" team.  Plain and simple.  He had a win now Captain in Pronger and supporting D squad and a win now space cadet goalie, but he had a couple of over the hill forwards and a bunch of players who had never played in the NHL or were thought to have some "potential".

 

Oh, I agree he didn't put together a "win now" team. I'm of the opinion he thought he had.

[King Knut]

14 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

Yeah that was then plan i'm sure to give G a better example of how a Captain is suppose to be. And Pronger did just that. However the eye injury derailed then plan greatly and instead of handing it to Kimmo the gave it to Giroux. That was one of their biggest mistakes too....the C was handed to him before he was ready.

 

Really?  How did Pronger do just that?  By berating the press after every game?  Was it Pronger who suggested Giroux get into "cop ass grabbing"?  Was it Pronger that gave Giroux the idea of disappearing in the 2nd round of the playoffs against the Devils and then never making it that far again?  

 

Maybe you didn't like Richards, maybe no one liked Richards, maybe Richards drank too much and maybe he got hooked on opioids because the Flyers training staff stuffed them down his throat like tic tacs when he was playing on two torn shoulders, but good lord, Richards' teams won a lot of games and they damn well won games in the playoffs.  

 

Not sure Giroux learned anything of consequence if he learned it from Pronger.

[King Knut]

4 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

Oh, I agree he didn't put together a "win now" team. I'm of the opinion he thought he had.

 

Then I'm literally back to the "Homer was even dumber than I thought" scenario.

[radoran]

1 minute ago, King Knut said:

 

Sure.  Not sure it would have changed anything other than that everyone here could stop saying "They gave Richards the captaincy too soon!"  

 

Richards as captain got farther than any captain since Dave Poulin and Clarke before him.  If that's getting it too soon, all Flyers captains should be so lucky.  

 

Eric Lindros says "hello"

 

And Richards didn't get there without Pronger - which was almost certainly on the minds of the "leadership" that canned Richards a year after he got as far as Poulin, Clarke and Lindros.

 

The "plan" (IMO) in giving the C to Smith was to encourage Smith to re-sign and give Richards a few more years before they gave him the C and not have it locked up on a player that was still on the roster.

 

The franchise effectively was pushing the C onto Mike "The Next Bobby Clarke" Richards when he was still in Kitchener.

[King Knut]

29 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

 

If you go back on this board and check out my posts you'll see that I believe "not reloading the gun" after 11-12 was a tragic, irrevocable mistake.

 

And it also demonstrates quite clearly that this franchise never "needed" Chris Pronger.

 

I'm totally with you and have been of the same opinion all along.  Letting Jagr go was STOOOOOOOOPID.  I didn't even like letting Carle go, but Carle dropped off a cliff after a couple of years so not giving him a new contract didn't hurt.  What did hurt was chasing after replacing him for several years.  Luke Schenn, Streit, MacDonald... 

 

And I agree on Pronger, though less adamantly. He helped a lot.   Him getting hurt wouldn't have been so damaging were it not for the draft picks involved in that trade.  

[OccamsRazor]

16 minutes ago, radoran said:

they should have given Timonen the C instead of Jason Smith.

 

I guess they could have they just gave it to the guy who had been a Captain for 5 year instead of the guy who had only been one for one year. The beauty of hindsight. However i don't think anyone expected Smith to break down as fast as he did.