On Accountability

[Howie58]

Here is a piece by John Boruk about accountability with the Flyers.  There are good young players--but it's unclear if anyone is holding them accountable for on-ice performance.  There is some truth to what he writes:

https://www.nbcsports.com/philadelphia/flyers

 

The comments in response to the article are an interesting read on the anger among the fan base and the contention it's time to move beyond Giroux and Voracek (particularly the latter).

 

 

 

[mojo1917]

thanks for posting this Howie.

I don't like Boruk very much. I'll just get that out of the way, I think he's mostly a handsome fella who thinks he's smart. 

I do think he wrote a thought provoking piece, though.

The voice that says 'move your bloomin' arse Dover" is definitely missing from this organization. 

You know who would act like that ? Hextall, and it meant something coming from him. He had the resume' and the title. Why didn't he act like that? 

Dave Scott can sit in the yard and eat worms for all these players care, he can rant and rave and for all I or they care he may as well be another disgruntled fan-  he can **** right the hell off. 

Giroux as has been documented is not the yell at his teammates guy, he is the guy that tries leads by example.

 

I think Voracek, may have been attempting his own "Kucherov" moment. I hope it works for him and the team, it is needed.

I also think it's funny how when Kucherov does it, he's a genius, but that's only with the benefit of hindsight. Do we think in the moment the lightning fans called him a whiner and lazy ass the way Voracek has been here ?

Wouldn't Voracek need to a season or two to follow up on his statement, before we can pass judgment on it?

 

It is tough to stay in the moment when the moment is hard.

[King Knut]

9 hours ago, Howie58 said:

Here is a piece by John Boruk about accountability with the Flyers.  There are good young players--but it's unclear if anyone is holding them accountable for on-ice performance.  There is some truth to what he writes:

https://www.nbcsports.com/philadelphia/flyers

 

The comments in response to the article are an interesting read on the anger among the fan base and the contention it's time to move beyond Giroux and Voracek (particularly the latter).

 

 

The heart and soul of this team is Coots (whether he wears a C or not, he’s the guy), TK, Hart and Provo.  

 

That’s the core as far as I’m concerned.  

 

Meantime however, G (especially),  Jake, & JVR are useful veterans with useful skill sets.  They can take a back seat as. At as leadership goes.   

 

They should also be held to the same standards as the kids as far as accountability though.

 

Coots is your workhorse leader who can dig deep and sometimes make magic happen with that extra gear in key games and moments.  He’s the leave it all on the ice guy this town loves and now he’s scoring enough that we’re all allowing ourselves to love him.  No one likes when I say I told you so, so I won’t... Not again. 

 

TK is the “I effing love hockey” guy. He’s the one under the opposition’s skin, the yapper, the speedy SOB with a killer shot who needs to get sprung more and more often. 

 

Provo is that rock D man who thought it was his fault when they lost to the Penguins in spite of the fact that his arm was useless and Hakstol, G and Jake all failed the team miserably. He is the picture of accountability.  He started this year rough as hell and worked through it and low and behold got better (the new coach certainly helped). 

 

Hart is their magic feather.  He makes them believe in themselves.  Now I just hope he can stay sharp and focused and play his game like only he can.  I worry about distractions and coaching goofiness screwing him up. 

 

  

[brelic]

I don't know, I just have a hard time with sports journalism in general. 

 

For us fans to sit here and navel gaze and play armchair GM, whatever. It's what fans do. It's how we pass the time between games and seasons. It's how we build a fanbase community.

 

But the normative language used throughout that piece is just bothersome to me - and of course, that is just my opinion. I'll just leave it at that. 

 

[Howie58]

1 hour ago, King Knut said:

eantime however, G (especially),  Jake, & JVR are useful veterans with useful skill sets.  They can take a back seat as. At as leadership goes.   

K-Squared: I agree they are "useful," but Coots, as you note, is the up-and-comer.  I fear Comcast is paying G and V a great deal for a diminishing product.  V....never understood the length or amount of contract. 

[Howie58]

43 minutes ago, brelic said:

But the normative language used throughout that piece is just bothersome to me - and of course, that is just my opinion. I'll just leave it at that. 

I guess when it comes to good or bad, there are normative "foundations."  I think the GM dismissal was accountability-based to the extent the H-Squared Duo wasn't delivering wins.  My sense: We have had poor, inconsistent play under four coaches, two of whom (Lavy, Berube) seem to be doing pretty well elsewhere.  Players have to hold themselves accountable.  But in the case of the Flyers, I think the architects and drafters have to ask themselves some tough questions.  I don't envy Fletcher.  We hope Hextall's raw material develops. If it doesn't, under Coach H, Q, Z, or Y, we have a really, really big hole to dig out of. 

[radoran]

Picking up on the theme, Robert Hagg:

https://www.nbcsports.com/philadelphia/flyers/talks-one-man-show-core-illustrate-trying-times-for-flyers

 

Quote

"I know we still have to stick with each other, play our game, play for the team, and that didn't happen today," Robert Hagg said. "It was too much of a one-man show out there, trying to do too much. For me, not a point-producing guy, it's frustrating. We're talking about before the game to do all the small things right for the team and we're going out there and doing exactly the opposite. It's frustrating.

"We have all the pieces, but we need to stick together and play as a team. I don't think we're doing that right now. It doesn't matter who you put out there, if you don't play together, it doesn't matter. If you're trying to do a one-man show for 60 minutes, you're going to end up 3-0 and in the back."

 

Again with the "we have all the pieces" line from this group.

 

No, you don't. If you "had all the pieces" you wouldn't still be looking to win a playoff round for the first time in seven years. You wouldn't be on the outside looking in. Again.

 

Stop telling us how good you are and start actually playing well.

 

As it is, this team has clearly quit on the season. And the locker room seems to be a Very Contentious place right now. Which is good - they should be unhappy.

 

But they've also go to do something about it.

[radoran]

2 hours ago, King Knut said:

The heart and soul of this team is Coots (whether he wears a C or not, he’s the guy), TK, Hart and Provo.  

 

That’s the core as far as I’m concerned.  

 

OK, as far as it goes. But G is still wearing the C and has three years on his deal. Jake has five. JVR has four.

 

From where I sit, this team isn't changing very much for the next three years unless there's a pretty major shakeup.

 

And to be clear, I do think there should be.

 

Proviewit's game has also fallen off a cliff this year. I'm hoping he can turn that around (and do think he can).

 

[murraycraven]

at this point everything I hear from this team is nothing more than in one ear and out the other.  I think it is plain as day, judging by the on ice performance, this team needs a kick in the arse.  We hear the same quotes over and over again and nothing seems to change.

 

I have become so apathetic towards this team it is really a shame...   Not sure what the answer is but I hope Fletch has a pulse on this team and is calculating future moves.

 

Berube is looking like an actual real head Coach these days yet it does not matter who is behind the bench for the Flyers - it all is just more of the same.   

[brelic]

22 minutes ago, radoran said:

Picking up on the theme, Robert Hagg:

https://www.nbcsports.com/philadelphia/flyers/talks-one-man-show-core-illustrate-trying-times-for-flyers

 

 

Again with the "we have all the pieces" line from this group.

 

No, you don't. If you "had all the pieces" you wouldn't still be looking to win a playoff round for the first time in seven years. You wouldn't be on the outside looking in. Again.

 

Stop telling us how good you are and start actually playing well.

 

As it is, this team has clearly quit on the season. And the locker room seems to be a Very Contentious place right now. Which is good - they should be unhappy.

 

But they've also go to do something about it.

 

I go back and forth on this. 

 

Do the NY Islanders all of a sudden "have all the pieces" this year, and subtracting Tavares was the magic move? Or was a competent, proven head coach a new "piece" they didn't know they needed?

 

I would like to believe the Flyers are playing the best they can under the circumstances that exist - personnel, coaching, development level, unpredictables like goalie injuries, head coach and GM dismissals, etc.

 

At the same time, there are red flags and signs for pause. Patrick's 1 goal in the last 20 games on the top line with the best player on the team is concerning. Is it just inexperience? Is he being asked to do too much for where he is at in his development? Other high draft picks have achieved much more in less time with less talent around them. But he is not them, he is his own player with his own development curve. Would he have developed quicker in a different environment? Slower? The same? 

 

Is Provorov over-rated in the sense they keep hoping beyond hope he is a #1, at 21 years old, when in fact he is not? Is it just a down year? Is it coaching? Or all of the upheaval this season (even though he was not good before all that started)? Is he more realistically a 2nd pairing player at this point in his development? 

 

What is the sweet spot between letting players make mistakes and grow into their roles, and putting them out there night after night in roles they are not yet able to play at the level that is expected of them - a level needed to be truly competitive? Are the expectations out of line with reality? Is it just an overall down year - again - because of all of the changes?

 

And finally, the big question, is this just what a team looks like when fans say they'd rather see the young guys get reps in, warts and all? 

 

Flyers have the most players 23 and under in the league with 10. That's half the roster. 5 of our 6 starting defensemen are under 23 - Provorov, Morin, Myers, Hagg, Sanheim. 

 

Have they overvalued their assets and pipeline? There are no elite-players-in-the-making at forward. There are between 1 and 3 on defense (Provorov, Ghost, Sanheim).

 

There is 1 in goal. 

 

I honestly don't know what to make of things. 

 

 

 

[radoran]

18 minutes ago, brelic said:

I honestly don't know what to make of things. 

 

I go by the results on the ice, not the potential on paper.

 

This team has achieved squat for seven years. Think about that. Seven years without a playoff series win. Seven years with only three rounds of playoffs.

 

And every year we hear that they actually are better than that - from them.

 

There comes a point at which that's just simply not true. This team needed a rookie phenom goalie to even be remotely competitive.

 

And even with that couldn't win a big game when they needed to and got blown out - blown out - in a "must win" by the Carolina Hurricanes.

 

They're 8-16-4 against the current playoff teams in the East. That's 20 of 56 points for a .357 win %. Winless against the Caps (0-4) and Bolts (0-1-2). They lost to the Caps three times in March.

 

31 minutes ago, brelic said:

And finally, the big question, is this just what a team looks like when fans say they'd rather see the young guys get reps in, warts and all? 

 

Could be, which is fine as far as it goes. I just think that desire is born of a fanbase that's sick and tired of the same ol' same ol' from the same ol' players.

 

And we've only got 3-5 more years of them, barring some sort of major shakeup.

[elmatus]

13 hours ago, Howie58 said:

Here is a piece by John Boruk about accountability with the Flyers.  There are good young players--but it's unclear if anyone is holding them accountable for on-ice performance.  There is some truth to what he writes:

https://www.nbcsports.com/philadelphia/flyers

 

The comments in response to the article are an interesting read on the anger among the fan base and the contention it's time to move beyond Giroux and Voracek (particularly the latter).

 

Very solid read, @Howie58.

 

On Sunday, Voracek was asked how the Flyers could break their pattern of making the playoffs one season and missing them the next.

"I don't know … I think we said the core was going to get traded," he said, frustrated and purposefully dramatic. "Maybe the core? Maybe we've got to get traded — me, G, Coots, I don't know. You'll figure it out."

 

Sounds like more than just a tad of frustration. Of course, this is kind of what you get from an interview like that anyway. 

[King Knut]

51 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

OK, as far as it goes. But G is still wearing the C and has three years on his deal. Jake has five. JVR has four.

 

From where I sit, this team isn't changing very much for the next three years unless there's a pretty major shakeup.

 

And to be clear, I do think there should be.

 

Proviewit's game has also fallen off a cliff this year. I'm hoping he can turn that around (and do think he can).

 

 

I think it really depends.  

 

-A coach like Gordon clearly won't have any issues giving minutes to the younger guys.

-A GM like Hextall (OBVIOUSLY NOT him mind you, just one LIKE him who doesn't give an eff) will trade an aging star with 5 years left on his contract no problem regardless of his production or lack thereof (see Hartnell, VLC, etc).  He may just have to take a lump that apparently even a hot pile of cocaine won't motivate like Lehtera in the return, but whatever.  

 

I don't think it's time for a major shakeup unless Panarin AND a new 2C (please god, not Duchene) is coming.  If Giroux can be their 1LW or 2LW he's going to keep producing for those three remaining years, maybe after that he makes an Yzerman or Sakic type shift and signs for a smaller contract.  I'll be happy to have him. 

 

At that point it's all about usage. 

 

The last 5 years because of the contract and cap situations, whether it was Lavvy or Berube or Hakstol, no coach really had many options as far as the top 6 went.  He had 3 good players and a bunch of rookies and or crap.    Now that's over.  The crap is gone and the rookies are coming into their own and there's $30 million to bring in fresh blood and resign the kids that are coming along.  

 

If Jakes the 3RW and on PP2 slots, then we won't hate him so much and if our 3RW can only put up 50+points, we should damn well be happy regardless of whether we think he makes too much for a 3RW because he put up 80 three times as a 1/2 RW.   It's not his fault he was on a crap team with 1.5 lines,  no defense or goalie at the time.  

 

If Fletcher can bring in some top 6 level talent with this cap space and resign the kids, that'll be great.

But the real key will be whoever they  bring in... be it Gordon or Q or whoever... Whoever that coach is will almost definitely not be the type who gives a flying fig about the salary or the expectation and will give the minutes to whomever is playing the way he wants them to.

 

That's the key.  

 

That's a big part of what changed with Gordon (at least on the bottom 6 where he had options).  Give Gordon (or whoever) options in the top 6 and let's see who the core ends up being by mid season.

 

I think that will sort itself out.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[brelic]

26 minutes ago, radoran said:

This team has achieved squat for seven years. Think about that. Seven years without a playoff series win. Seven years with only three rounds of playoffs.

 

To be fair, this "team" isn't the same one as 7 years ago. That makes a difference in terms of who's responsible.

 

Going back 7 years, there are 3 players still on the team now. Giroux, Voracek, and Couturier.

 

Going back 4 years ago, there are 8.5 players still on the team. Giroux, Voracek, Couturier, Laughton, Raffl, Gostisbehere, Gudas, MacDonald, and Neuvirth (0.5). 

 

The radical transformation of the roster and pipeline from 7 years ago is astonishing. 

 

2012-13 depth - Akeson, McGinn, Roe, Noebels, Gustafsson, Manning, Harry Z, Wellwood. 

 

Bottom line is that G, V, and Coots are the last men standing. 

 

Are they to blame?

 

[radoran]

1 minute ago, brelic said:

To be fair, this "team" isn't the same one as 7 years ago. That makes a difference in terms of who's responsible.

 

From where I sit, under the terms either "no one" is accountable or, yes, the VeeGee + Cee have some part in the whole thing.

 

I'll give Couturier something of a pass as he's only 26.
 

And then we can say that Gee and Vee have actually put up numbers and so they've done their part.

 

So, nobody's "to blame." It's just seven wasted years of hockey.

 

Hooray! They really are a good team and they just have to put it together next season.

 

Again.

[brelic]

6 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

From where I sit, under the terms either "no one" is accountable or, yes, the VeeGee + Cee have some part in the whole thing.

 

I'll give Couturier something of a pass as he's only 26.
 

And then we can say that Gee and Vee have actually put up numbers and so they've done their part.

 

So, nobody's "to blame." It's just seven wasted years of hockey.

 

Hooray! They really are a good team and they just have to put it together next season.

 

Again.

 

Honestly, I see the biggest area of concern going forward as the lack of an elite forward to take the torch from Giroux. 

 

I think Patrick will be a very good player in this league. My guess is his floor is #2C, and ceiling would be a very good #1C, not an elite one. 

 

Outside of Patrick, who do we have that could match Giroux's level of production in the future?

 

Frost? Farabee? Those are the two most likely candidates, but they've yet to play an NHL game, so we really have no idea. 

 

And without a player or players in the top 5% of the league, can you win a Cup in today's NHL?

 

[murraycraven]

34 minutes ago, King Knut said:

He may just have to take a lump that apparently even a hot pile of cocaine won't motivate like Lehtera in the return, but whatever. 

 

 

this sentence is f'ing hysterical!!!!   LOL....  Thanks for making me laugh K2!

[mojo1917]

@radoran

Reading this thread I am beginning to think this team has been terrible since going all in on Bryz, Parise and Suter.

 

I am wondering if the VeeGees masked just how terrible the team has been?

 

If you're the captain of a team you've carried for 6 years with little help, for example dim-witted Brayden Schenn is your #2 guy for 4 of the years,  do you when interviewed say "well we suck and after Couturier this roster is ****"?  You can if you want to be wiping Tiger Balmtm out of your equipment for the rest of your career. 

You have to try to drag the guys along raise them to your level of play, irrespective of the fact that it is not possible. 

The inconsistencies from year to year are variable to just how terrible the team has been. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[radoran]

4 minutes ago, brelic said:

And without a player or players in the top 5% of the league, can you win a Cup in today's NHL?

 

The Flyers had three guys in the top 26 of points last year (2, 15, 26). They didn't get out of the first round.

 

Vegas had one (24th) and made the Final.

 

Hockey is still a team sport.

 

But your team has to play consistent hockey. None of this "half a season" stuff.

 

This year the Islanders' top scorer is Barzal at 63rd in the league. They at least made the playoffs.

 

Anything can happen!

[radoran]

2 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

Reading this thread I am beginning to think this team has been terrible since going all in on Bryz, Parise and Suter.

 

I am wondering if the VeeGees masked just how terrible the team has been?

 

I think it is likely, actually.

 

But I'm sure you, like me, has all the confidence in the world that the guy who went all-in on Bryz/Parise/Suter will pick the right guy to make the right moves to fix it all.

 

Or, you know, something...

 

And I do get the idea that players "have to" say "the right things." What's interesting to me is that at least this year they're not.

 

Hagg says they're not playing "as a team."  Voracek says the team choked (and, to be fair, said after 16-17 that if they didn't play well in 17-18 the team should probably be blown up).

 

From where I sit, though, one should not be saying - after six years - that the team is "good enough."

 

They're not. The results speak for themselves.

[elmatus]

24 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

Honestly, I see the biggest area of concern going forward as the lack of an elite forward to take the torch from Giroux. 

 

I think Patrick will be a very good player in this league. My guess is his floor is #2C, and ceiling would be a very good #1C, not an elite one. 

 

Outside of Patrick, who do we have that could match Giroux's level of production in the future?

 

Frost? Farabee? Those are the two most likely candidates, but they've yet to play an NHL game, so we really have no idea. 

 

And without a player or players in the top 5% of the league, can you win a Cup in today's NHL?

 

 

This seems spot on to me. 

 

Who is to blame for the last whatever years of mediocrity? Yeah, probably Giroux, Voracek, Couts, Simmonds, Ghost can shoulder a good amount of that blame. That would seem pretty logical. The coaching staff as well has been a train wreck, so that doesn't help. I don't imagine it's one or the other of those things though, it's likely partially both.

 

I also agree 100% in that we are going to miss Giroux production. Can we catch a lucky break twice with someone like Frost? That would be amazing, but it would seem unlikely. As far as Patrick goes, I would say so far the 1.5-2C thing seems most likely, though he clearly still has room to grow. He doesn't really show enough high end skill for me to say he's clearly our 1C of the future. He slept through much of the last two seasons really.

 

Farabee? Who knows. He's a kid still. Also that's a lot to shoulder for anyone. We have to appreciate exactly how amazing Giroux has been in his tenure (at least with regards to production). He hasn't really been great where it counts most unfortunately, but this is a team sport as @ruxpin has mentioned.

 

So if we can't replace Giroux's production with current players, then what? We hope to get lucky with some future pick? We tank and get one near the top? I have no real solution for this. We're talking franchise players here who are almost all top 1-2-3 picks. It's possible we could finish that low next season if this team doesn't shape up, but that seems like a bad run even for this crew of underachievers.

 

We also somehow need to get last season's Provorov back. He went from franchise pillar to the new hands of scone in one off season. That's not good.

[OccamsRazor]

54 minutes ago, brelic said:

Are they to blame?

 

Yes.

 

But to be sure let's just remove one.

 

It like you are trying to get a recipe right you don't go changing a bunch of stuff all at once when you are looking for the right mix.

 

You change one thing at a time.

 

So for this experiment I nominate Jake of these 3 to be the first to change to see if it helps.

 

That is as good a start as any...

 

[brelic]

9 minutes ago, elmatus said:

This seems spot on to me. 

 

It's as yuge as a dragon's nest.

 

9 minutes ago, elmatus said:

I also agree 100% in that we are going to miss Giroux production. Can we catch a lucky break twice with someone like Frost? That would be amazing, but it would seem unlikely. As far as Patrick goes, I would say so far the 1.5-2C thing seems most likely, though he clearly still has room to grow. He doesn't really show enough high end skill for me to say he's clearly our 1C of the future. He slept through much of the last two seasons really.

 

Farabee? Who knows. He's a kid still. Also that's a lot to shoulder for anyone. We have to appreciate exactly how amazing Giroux has been in his tenure (at least with regards to production). He hasn't really been great where it counts most unfortunately, but this is a team sport as @ruxpin has mentioned.

 

So if we can't replace Giroux's production with current players, then what? We hope to get lucky with some future pick? We tank and get one near the top? I have no real solution for this. We're talking franchise players here who are almost all top 1-2-3 picks. It's possible we could finish that low next season if this team doesn't shape up, but that seems like a bad run even for this crew of underachievers.

 

I mean, we definitely could get lucky in terms of finding a bona fide star outside of the 1st round. There are certainly others like Kucherov and Point, as well as latter 1st round hits like Giroux and Kuznetsov. Maybe Frost or Farabee can be that guy.

 

We already found one in Ghost - if he can ever find his game back. And Hart looks like a 2nd round gem. 

 

Boston is probably the only example of a team over the last decade to win a Cup without anyone on their team playing at elite levels offensively. Lucic was the top point getter with 62.

 

Of course, they did have a goalie with a .938 save percentage.

 

15 minutes ago, elmatus said:

We also somehow need to get last season's Provorov back. He went from franchise pillar to the new hands of scone in one off season. That's not good.

 

Ahh, the Hands of Scone have been passed on. Finally Coots has regular human hands to do all of the scoring. 

 

[brelic]

8 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

So for this experiment I nominate Jake of these 3 to be the first to change to see if it helps.

 

He's the most likely to be traded, IMO. 

 

 

[OccamsRazor]

44 minutes ago, radoran said:

They're not. The results speak for themselves.

 

They're not.

 

Good teams don't have to annually come back during a season they started so poorly.

 

Good teams don't have to continually come back in a game because they didn't come to play when the puck dropped.

 

It's like what Hagg and Jake have said is with the intentions of drawing sympathy from the fans but after 6 or7 years of this same ol sh it I am fresh out of it.

 

Done. It has to change. This offseason.

 

No more.

 

And I don't know how or where to start.

 

And I am glad I don't have to make those decisions.