vis Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 17 hours ago, FD19372 said: Great player, and totally deserving. Short, but dominant career. The whole Lindros era infuriates me to no end, however. Not for anything Eric did, but for the circus his parents created to some extent, the ineptitude and arrogance of Bob Clarke, (not Bobby Clarke who I LOVED and was of course one of my all-time favorite Flyers) and Ed Snider in their insistence that they should throw all of their money into that line, and not surround them with any at least decent scoring talent on offense, none who were in their prime for sure. In addition, not prioritizing goaltending whatsoever. MANAGEMENT blew it in that era, not Eric and the Legion of Doom. Plain and simple. They should have won the Cup in 2000, and had they had more scoring from other lines, would have - Devils or no Devils. 100% spot on. The Flyers hit paydirt with the Legion of Doom and did nothing to continue to develop players and build slowly. From the minute they made the conference finals in the lockout shortened season, they figured they were good enough and stopped building. Terrible management. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vis Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 15 hours ago, ruxpin said: I think this is oddly accurate. He almost won game 6 by himself because at that point no one really wanted to play with him. Putting him in there was a morale and chemistry killer. They win that series if he doesn't play. I've no idea what happens in the next round, but they win that series. Yep. I think Keith Jones has said the players didn't want him back. They felt they didn't need him and wanted to prove that they didn't need him. That was their motivation. When he came back, the team unraveled and couldn't buy a goal after scoring a bunch of goals in the first four games. And then Stevens landed the coup de grace and took the air out of the arena in the first period of Game 7. It was such a surreal feeling in the arena. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 2 minutes ago, vis said: I don't know if Clarke's role had much to do with the longevity of his career. Unless you mean Lindros' career in Philly, in which case I would agree that absent his strained relationship with Clarke (and the organization in general), Lindros probably would never have left. However, I don't think it is one-sided. The Lindros family deserves some blame for the deterioration in the relationship, though I do think Clarke fueled the flames a little higher on several occasions. I literally think Eric would have had fewer injuries had the Flyers committed to protecting him as a franchise player the way other generational players are protected. If a player like Kasparitus had headhunted Gretzky or Lemieux the way he went after Lindros, there would have been hell to pay and he would have been a target around the league and his team mates probably would have disowned him. Clarke seemed to have this perspective that he took care of himself on the ice and no one protected him... which was far from the truth. That seemed to translate to the idea that Eric needed to protect himself and be "a man" out there. It was what was set up when eric came into the league, it continued after Clarke departed and it remained en force when Clarke returned (at a point when Eric really started needing some help). The knee was one thing, but by the time he had the punctured lung and the third concussion, the team really needed to step in and start taking care of their investment. I don't know what involvement the Lindros family had in deciding that Eric was cleared to play hockey when he clearly wasn't healthy and I don't know what involvement they had in the team deciding not to protect in it's investment (regardless of how the players felt about him, he's your captain, he's your biggest investment and if he's healthy, he's your best chance to win-letting him take abuse and get hurt repeatedly is JUST STUPID. Making it known that if you hurt our guy, you're going to get hurt in kind (or your best guy is going to get hurt in kind) would have put a stop to those shenanigans pretty quickly. But there was very little retribution for what teams got away with on Lindros. Which may be because he was a brat at the draft (is refusing to sign with a team that intentionally threw games to get their 4th top draft pick in a row really bratty?) and it may be because his parents were jerks and it may be because he played like a steamroller with silky mits and they just couldn't stop him any other way... but no matter what it was it wasn't sportsmanlike and it wasn't fair and it shortened his career more than him not skating with his head up did. 2 minutes ago, vis said: I place a lot of blame on the NHL for not reeling in headshots and other dirty hits. The 90s and early 2000s were ridiculous in terms of the nastiness of the game and the unwillingness of the NHL to reign it in. I like tough hockey, but deliberate headshots are terrible and have no part in the game. Never liked the "keep your head up" argument when it comes to deliberate headshots. I completely agree. I also blame the league because quite frankly, if teams had gone after players like Messier, Lemieux, Yzerman, Sakic or Forsberg the way they went after Lindros, there would have been league meetings all summer and new rules the following year. It straight up wasn't fair because the league straight up didn't like Eric. But I do put blame on Clarke and the Flyers too because while in today's league that's just assumed to be the way it goes, but in the 80's and 90's, the best way to protect your super star was to put someone bigger and meaner than everyone else on the ice. Adding to the problem was the fact that the biggest and meanest guy on the Flyers WAS their superstar. 2 minutes ago, vis said: I do think Lindros felt pressure to come back from injuries quicker and perhaps he didn't fully recover from a few of them, in which case perhaps the Flyers organization - and hockey culture in general - can be blamed. In any event, the NHL and NFL have a lot of problems with potential concussion lawsuits and other fallout. It's not just limited to one player or an organization. I think lessons were learned. I remember Primeau trying and trying to come back and Clarke having to tell him, look... we just can't let you do it. Which has to be the hardest thing (even harder for Primeau i'd think because it was essentially ending his career, not his season) but sometimes as a manager you have to look at the big picture and the long term. A healthy Lindros is better for your team. Even if you never play him again, you can trade him for a lot more if he's never unconscious on the ice in game seven of the ECFs for everyone to see. 2 minutes ago, vis said: The Lindros saga has a lot of elements to it. Just a sad situation all the way around - and it started even before he became an NHL player. Agreed. I have no idea how the Flyers recover from those terrible seasons if he's never on the team. John LeClair never happens. Rico probably never happens. But then again, Forseberg... so I don't know what to say about it. Clearly the Nordiques never become the Avalanche and they probably never get Roy which means they might not ever win those cups (but who the hell knows?) Overall, I just think the player got a bad rap and the team did not handle him intelligently and it cost both in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vis Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 42 minutes ago, King Knut said: If a player like Kasparitus had headhunted Gretzky or Lemieux the way he went after Lindros, there would have been hell to pay and he would have been a target around the league and his team mates probably would have disowned him. True, but that was a different NHL. And the Flyers did try to get some players to police things. Lindros wasn't left completely to his own devices. (Remember the Dan line?) I do wish the Flyers retaliated more for those hits, even though guys like Kasparaitis, Pilon and Stevens (to a lesser extent) were turtling cowards. The league created that issue with the advent of the instigator and never taking appropriate action against those players. 42 minutes ago, King Knut said: Clarke seemed to have this perspective that he took care of himself on the ice and no one protected him... which was far from the truth. That seemed to translate to the idea that Eric needed to protect himself and be "a man" out there. Well, see above. I do think the Flyers tried to get some players to protect him, but doing so was sometimes for naught. 42 minutes ago, King Knut said: Which may be because he was a brat at the draft (is refusing to sign with a team that intentionally threw games to get their 4th top draft pick in a row really bratty?) and it may be because his parents were jerks and it may be because he played like a steamroller with silky mits and they just couldn't stop him any other way... but no matter what it was it wasn't sportsmanlike and it wasn't fair and it shortened his career more than him not skating with his head up did. I definitely think there was some animosity against Lindros and there was a feeling that he could take care of himself around the league. Teams felt they could run at him because he was physical with them. Refs let a lot of dirty stuff go against Lindros as a result. 42 minutes ago, King Knut said: I also blame the league because quite frankly, if teams had gone after players like Messier, Lemieux, Yzerman, Sakic or Forsberg the way they went after Lindros, there would have been league meetings all summer and new rules the following year. It straight up wasn't fair because the league straight up didn't like Eric. Well, to be fair, Stevens didn't get a suspension for his hit on Kariya. Granted it was the POs, but that hit was devasting and merited action. League didn't do anything about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poulin20 Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 20 hours ago, King Knut said: It was a different age in which targeting a player like Lindros was tolerated and in fact viewed as his fault for not protecting himself. The league has changed dramatically so much so that players like Gudas are suspended for clean hits against much less important players. At the same time, in the 80's if you took a run like that at Gretzky or Lemieux, you'd have had to answer for it and you'd have been ostracized by the league in general. It was somehow the fact that Lindros was so big and could bull doze through defenses himself that it gave the league officials and offices justification to look the other way when guys like Kasparitus would freight train him so ruthlessly. Additionally, I still believe that it was a combination of Lindros and the league wide adoption of "the Trap" defensive system that lead to the clutch and grab era that directly lead to rules changes that have completely limited contact in almost any form... just 10 years too late to help Eric or the Flyers out. Eric because no one could slow him down without clutching and grabbing and "the Trap" because when the Devils showed a crappy team could win multiple cups playing it, everyone wanted to do it... the only problem was while the Devils were mostly under-talented, they had at least 2 pairings of experienced strong D men who could actually play the trap and most of the rest of the league didn't have a single pairing that could manage it without grotesquely clutching and grabbing. +1 ..nuff said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammer2 Posted August 30, 2017 Share Posted August 30, 2017 Did Bonnie and Clyde give the ok for this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted August 30, 2017 Share Posted August 30, 2017 20 minutes ago, jammer2 said: Did Bonnie and Clyde give the ok for this? If you give Eric a puck, he'll never see his retired number banner. He can't carry a puck and look up at the same time. Too soon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted August 30, 2017 Share Posted August 30, 2017 6 hours ago, ruxpin said: If you give Eric a puck, he'll never see his retired number banner. He can't carry a puck and look up at the same time. Too soon? Well let's not forget he could dish it out as well as receive it too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ8812 Posted August 30, 2017 Share Posted August 30, 2017 On 28/08/2017 at 2:58 PM, King Knut said: It was a different age in which targeting a player like Lindros was tolerated and in fact viewed as his fault for not protecting himself. The league has changed dramatically so much so that players like Gudas are suspended for clean hits against much less important players. At the same time, in the 80's if you took a run like that at Gretzky or Lemieux, you'd have had to answer for it and you'd have been ostracized by the league in general. It was somehow the fact that Lindros was so big and could bull doze through defenses himself that it gave the league officials and offices justification to look the other way when guys like Kasparitus would freight train him so ruthlessly. Additionally, I still believe that it was a combination of Lindros and the league wide adoption of "the Trap" defensive system that lead to the clutch and grab era that directly lead to rules changes that have completely limited contact in almost any form... just 10 years too late to help Eric or the Flyers out. Eric because no one could slow him down without clutching and grabbing and "the Trap" because when the Devils showed a crappy team could win multiple cups playing it, everyone wanted to do it... the only problem was while the Devils were mostly under-talented, they had at least 2 pairings of experienced strong D men who could actually play the trap and most of the rest of the league didn't have a single pairing that could manage it without grotesquely clutching and grabbing. If people think players like Crosby are protected, you should go back and watch Gretzky. I'm not trying to take anything away from the greatest hockey player of all time, but you weren't even allowed to touch him in any way, or you'd get penalty or get your face pounded in by a player that could barely skate whose sole job was to protect Wayne. The trap ruined the NHL. I'm glad that the league has cracked down on clutching and grabbing but recently they've been letting it go. They need to return to calling that crap the same way they did after the original lockout. I'll never forget that series against the Panthers where Jovanoski literally had to ride on Lindros' back the entire series to stop him. Refs didn't call **** all then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted August 30, 2017 Share Posted August 30, 2017 53 minutes ago, RJ8812 said: If people think players like Crosby are protected, you should go back and watch Gretzky. I'm not trying to take anything away from the greatest hockey player of all time, but you weren't even allowed to touch him in any way, or you'd get penalty or get your face pounded in by a player that could barely skate whose sole job was to protect Wayne. I agree with all that which is why I mentioned Gretzky and Lemieux (who had it similarly easy). The league protected them to a degree, but by and large it was their teams and their organization making it a priority for their teams. 53 minutes ago, RJ8812 said: The trap ruined the NHL. I'm glad that the league has cracked down on clutching and grabbing but recently they've been letting it go. They need to return to calling that crap the same way they did after the original lockout. I'll never forget that series against the Panthers where Jovanoski literally had to ride on Lindros' back the entire series to stop him. Refs didn't call **** all then The problem wasn't the trap (though that sucked and made hockey boring) the problem was 85% of the NHL wasn't talented enough to pull off a trap defense and in trying they ended up having to clutch and grab. They tried changing the rules for a decade to shut this down. It began in earnest after the '97 finals in which Konstantinov was basically an added appendage to Lindros and the league openly admitted that was a problem and claimed they'd crack down on it. Didn't happen for real for another 10 years almost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted August 30, 2017 Share Posted August 30, 2017 6 hours ago, OccamsRazor said: Well let's not forget he could dish it out as well as receive it too... This was essentially Eric's frustration at what Konstantinov had been doing to him all series coming out. More nagging him with blatant holds and hooks that rendered him ineffective more than big hits (though he could throw those too). Of course, what ended up happening to Vlad is much worse than what happened to Eric and in spite of it all happening off the ice, it really made one think about all the head hunting and dangerous hits going on ON the ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted August 30, 2017 Share Posted August 30, 2017 3 minutes ago, King Knut said: it really made one think about all the head hunting and dangerous hits going on ON the ice. Yes he got his share of it too... I love how the announcer says Lindros took a shoulder to the nose and then says it"s a clean hit....laughable.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted August 30, 2017 Share Posted August 30, 2017 8 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said: Yes he got his share of it too... I love how the announcer says Lindros took a shoulder to the nose and then says it"s a clean hit....laughable.... I am so filled with rage watching these two hits again. The Islanders announcers have always been almost as bad as the Devils (I see a lot of games with their feeds) but this assertion that Pilon can not only take out a guy's legs like that, not only do it away from the puck (in fact he did it instead of handling the puck) but that it was in hitting the glass as a result of the hit that Eric got hurt, NOT the HIT... it's just insanity and frankly extremely dangerous considering how many youth hockey players probably went out and thought this was perfectly acceptable behavior. The Kasparitus hit was always one of the darkest moments in NHL history to me. What's funniest about the "shoulder to the nose" comment is that in the replay slow mo, you can clearly see that Kasparitus' elbow makes contact with Lindros' face first, Lindros flinches back then, it's at that point that the shoulder makes contact. There was nothing about that hit that was clean. IT wasn't legal then to target a guy's face either. The big talk of the era was "leaving the skates" but you still couldn't elbow a guy in the face... especially when he didn't have the puck. People blame the Stevens hit, but this is legitimately the hit that ruined eric's career and the hell of it was that Kasparitus had been gunning for him for a long long time. They had a long history of this kind of crap and the league just ignored it and Clarke just ignored it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted August 30, 2017 Share Posted August 30, 2017 2 minutes ago, King Knut said: People blame the Stevens hit, but this is legitimately the hit that ruined eric's career and the hell of it was that Kasparitus had been gunning for him for a long long time Yeah the Gill hit didn't help at all either... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted August 30, 2017 Share Posted August 30, 2017 Bringing back memories.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poconono Posted August 30, 2017 Share Posted August 30, 2017 At the time I never remember seeing or hearing Lindros bash the organization whereas Clarke and Eddie couldn't keep their yaps shut. I don't care how meddling the Lindros parents might have been behind the scene, at least they weren't whining publicly. And when I read about Eric's joyful home life today and his dedication to the whole sports concussion situation I couldn't be happier for the guy. Make all the stupid jokes about keeping your head up but in my view Eric has always been a class act. My favorite Flyer ever and second only to Gretzky in my list of favorite players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammer2 Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 6 hours ago, Poconono said: I don't care how meddling the Lindros parents might have been behind the scene, at least they weren't whining publicly. Are you for real with that??? One of the reasons the whole thing escalated out of control was how vocal Bonnie and Clyde were in the press, in the newspaper, radio, tv...you name it. That is not even counting the fact his Dad was his agent and negotiated everything in public. Clarke was certainly not without blame, but in this case, it DEFINITELY took 2 to tango. Eric's Mom and Dad were everything a hockey parent should not be. To this day, I don't think Eric ever reached his true potential because his parents could never, ever just cut the apron string. They basically stopped him from being an individual mature adult, he was always "their son"...not a man who could stand on his own....at least that was my impression, and I know I'm not alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 1 hour ago, jammer2 said: Are you for real with that??? One of the reasons the whole thing escalated out of control was how vocal Bonnie and Clyde were in the press, in the newspaper, radio, tv...you name it. That is not even counting the fact his Dad was his agent and negotiated everything in public. Clarke was certainly not without blame, but in this case, it DEFINITELY took 2 to tango. Eric's Mom and Dad were everything a hockey parent should not be. To this day, I don't think Eric ever reached his true potential because his parents could never, ever just cut the apron string. They basically stopped him from being an individual mature adult, he was always "their son"...not a man who could stand on his own....at least that was my impression, and I know I'm not alone. Thank you. I was going to respond earlier but had to get offline and never got back to it. I'll make all the stupid jokes I care to about keeping his whiney a## head up. Yeah, I jumped on the bandwagon when things were good, but I always had other flyers that were my favorites even while he played. Why? Because he was a shadow of a little man boy who never left his mother's nipple. And that's plain fact. They screwed over the juniors team that was good enough for Gretzky, screwed over Quebec in exactly the same way, and screwed the Flyers. And get your damn head up. People talk about bringing the team back to relevance. I suppose maybe that's true, but what I know is that the team we traded with to get Baby Bobblehead Nipple Lips went on to take that bounty and won two Cups. I don't remember a 90s parade in Philly. Retire the number. Have your silly pregame ceremony (again). No one is going to wear 88 in Philly anyway. Whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammer2 Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 11 minutes ago, ruxpin said: Thank you. I was going to respond earlier but had to get offline and never got back to it. I'll make all the stupid jokes I care to about keeping his whiney a## head up. Yeah, I jumped on the bandwagon when things were good, but I always had other flyers that were my favorites even while he played. Why? Because he was a shadow of a little man boy who never left his mother's nipple. And that's plain fact. They screwed over the juniors team that was good enough for Gretzky, screwed over Quebec in exactly the same way, and screwed the Flyers. And get your damn head up. People talk about bringing the team back to relevance. I suppose maybe that's true, but what I know is that the team we traded with to get Baby Bobblehead Nipple Lips went on to take that bounty and won two Cups. I don't remember a 90s parade in Philly. Retire the number. Have your silly pregame ceremony (again). No one is going to wear 88 in Philly anyway. Whatever. Regardless of how talented the guy was....I share your anger. Like you said, there was NO PARADE in Philly during the 90's. Honestly, I could have done without the whole damn soap opera. Give me a young Forsberg, the other guys who got thrown in and call it a damn @&%# day!!! If it was just Eric, I might be persuaded, but those two ego driven/nipple offering/media whore/ excuse for parents unfortunately, come as a package deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammer2 Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 23 minutes ago, ruxpin said: Why? Because he was a shadow of a little man boy who never left his mother's nipple. And that's plain fact. There was a creepy irony to Eric. A "man's man" on the ice, and a sheltered Mama's boy off the ice. It was VERY unmanly, the way he used them as a crutch. No matter how tough he acted, we all knew the underlying sheepish truth....it made a lot of people side with Clarke, even though he was a tool through the whole process also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 1 minute ago, jammer2 said: There was a creepy irony to Eric. A "man's man" on the ice, and a sheltered Mama's boy off the ice. It was VERY unmanly, the way he used them as a crutch. No matter how tough he acted, we all knew the underlying sheepish truth....it made a lot of people side with Clarke, even though he was a tool through the whole process also. Yeah, and that's a good point regarding Clarke. My dislike of the Lindroses aside, Clarke gets no pass in that whole episode. He, too, acted like a spiteful little child. Now that I've thrown arguably the two biggest Flyers icons under the bus... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammer2 Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 7 minutes ago, ruxpin said: Yeah, and that's a good point regarding Clarke. My dislike of the Lindroses aside, Clarke gets no pass in that whole episode. He, too, acted like a spiteful little child. Now that I've thrown arguably the two biggest Flyers icons under the bus... You might have thrown them under the bus, but I laid the spikes down....LOL! I learned a LONG time ago that when speaking about Clarke, I have to separate the icon who played on the ice and the off ice tool that uttered the infamous quote "it's not our fault that Roger got cancer"....AND despite playing WITH Parent, never quite figured out that a really good goalie could make all the difference!! I mean, could you FRIGGIN imagine what kind of a team Hexy would put together *without* a salary cap?!? Clarke had so many kicks at the can it was almost criminal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 7 hours ago, jammer2 said: Like you said, there was NO PARADE in Philly during the 90's. Well that isn't all Eric's fault.....the front office could have got him better teammates....like some defensemen and a goalie to start. Then another line besides his. It's all the Wings had to do was shut down one line....which they did and they were swept... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 35 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said: Well that isn't all Eric's fault.....the front office could have got him better teammates....like some defensemen and a goalie to start. Then another line besides his. It's all the Wings had to do was shut down one line....which they did and they were swept... Well, it makes it a little hard to build a team when you trade all your assets for Baby Eric. That's not all his fault either, but it's directly associated with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 13 minutes ago, ruxpin said: Well, it makes it a little hard to build a team when you trade all your assets for Baby Eric. That's not all his fault either, but it's directly associated with him. That is horseshi!t. When did that trade happen 91? They were in the finals in 96-97. There was no salary cap. You could just buy your team. Let's just be honest. Clarke was a suck ass GM. And he showed it many times. Signing Gezzer instead of Joseph in net was one of his biggest ones. Even keeping Hextall when they brought him back and he couldn't stop a beach ball...then having Snow back him up. Yikes. Trading for Oates. Too many to name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.