Jump to content

On Accountability


Howie58

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

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

 

 

 

He should great players don't go stretches of one goal in 9 games.

 

From the start of November till the end of the year he scored one goal in a 9 game stretch 3 damn times.

 

That is down right terrible for a guy making 8.5 mill a year.

 

Unacceptable. Someone needs to be voted off the Island and it needs to be him.

 

Talk about choking. Does he have a mirror at all in his house?

 

He damn sure needs to be looking in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

He should great players don't go stretches of one goal in 9 games.

 

From the start of November till the end of the year he scored one goal in a 9 game stretch 3 damn times.

 

That is down right terrible for a guy making 8.5 mill a year.

 

Unacceptable. Someone needs to be voted off the Island and it needs to be him.

 

Talk about choking. Does he have a mirror at all in his house?

 

He damn sure needs to be looking in it.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, brelic said:

 

 

 

 

 

So would have loved to known what he saw.

 

I saw a guy who did a hel of a lot of floating and half ass back checking pretending he cared.

 

Now I'm not saying he was the only one.

 

Simmer did it almost as him it's why I wanted him gone.

 

JVR did his fare share of it too.

 

Even Coots a few times (a few i seen with him he looked gased).

 

JVR I guess you have deal with or it made it a little more tolerable when he went or his torrid scoring spree.

 

But the point is Jake wasn't pulling his weight and it has been happen for awhile now.

 

And i"ve had my fill and it's time to send a message.

 

Simmer being moved didn't send the message because many knew it might happen being in the last year of his deal and all.

 

But Jake one of the biggest stars on the team well you move him with his contract that night just send the right message.

 

And I don't mean just trade him for the sake of trading him...do it and get something of need back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, radoran said:

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... 👺

Man, it keeps coming back to this for me too.

 

The fact that that guy went and hired the guy that did get Parise and Suter...is well, my belly hurts thinking about it. 

Those guys will be being paid by that organization for many more years and they're terrible and they have zero VeeGees.

 

I can only hope that Chuck's dad didn't donate 2.4 million to Harvard to get his son into that school to help; you know, even things up for his boy, and that Chuck learned some things from his first not stellar go-round in Minnesota.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, radoran said:

 

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! 👺

 

Depth and coaching beat an amazing top six at least 4 out of 7 times. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, brelic said:

 

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?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Right,  what exactly changed over there to make them so good? Same players,  minus their best player, better goaltending,  Barry Trotz and the Lamorillo factor. I think on paper we have a much better team than the Islanders, but our results are not there. It's got to be coaching, leadership and confidence.  We have guys like Lindblom and Patrick who play like blossoming stars for 10 games and then disappear for 20 games. We have vets who wait 30 games into the season to start contributing. Through their history the best  Flyers teams were never the most talented team on the ice, but no team worked harder . I  remember old time Flyers teams would come out swarming right at the drop of the puck and forecheck the opponents into  submission  and bombard the opposing goalie. Now we sleepwalk through half the game and are down early constantly. We are so streaky and inconsistent,  to me that is lack of preparation. I think if we had a Pronger and Richards style leader it would make a huge difference. G and Voracek are too laid back, it's not their personality to lead. Will a combination of Quenville , a defenseman and a consistent winger be the solution,  I hope so.I still believe a veteran dman is going to be acquired,  but hes got to not only be a stabilizing force on the ice, he also has to be a leader. I think with better all around leadership we will have more confidence,  which will lead to more consistent play. The Isles are a perfect example, we have a much more talented team than them Coaching , leadership and execution has made the difference. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, RonJeremy said:

Flyers teams were never the most talented team on the ice, but no team worked harder .

 

Yes and there were waaaay more physical.

 

The Blair Betts, the Ashams and the Lappys.

 

Guys will slow down come the 3rd period if you take the body through out the game.

 

It seems like they have sacrificed that for speed and you shouldn't have to. You can have both.

 

You just have to find it. Or at least the right blend amongst the roster.

 

And they don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, if you have a chance to draft a player with skill and size that would be great, but hes gotta have a bit of a mean streak. JVR has size and skill ,but hes not physical,  hes about as intimidating as Baby Hughie. With each passing generation, there are more and more soyboys and less crazy Canadian kids like Tocchet and Behn Wilson.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, King Knut said:

 

Depth and coaching beat an amazing top six at least 4 out of 7 times. 

it does, in my opinion this team has neither, they need q and improve the top six by trades/ fa, relying on young inexperience players and bad coaching is what hurt us this year. we cant go next year with the same problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tucson83 said:

it does, in my opinion this team has neither, they need q and improve the top six by trades/ fa, relying on young inexperience players and bad coaching is what hurt us this year. we cant go next year with the same problems.

 

Last year they went into the stretch run and the playoffs without a healthy goalie.  That killed them even more than depth.  

 

I think they can can get away with adding one guy (maybe 2 if they can get a good 2/3C) and Frost.  

 

I’m not sold on Q.  Something doesn’t feel right about that but I can’t say what. 

 

It wont be a tragedy if they stick with Gordon, but I think it’ll likely be Q unless he really wants to go back to St. Louis for some reason. 

 

I like Sheldon Keefe. But they likely won’t get him for that role. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RonJeremy said:

Yep, if you have a chance to draft a player with skill and size that would be great, but hes gotta have a bit of a mean streak. JVR has size and skill ,but hes not physical,  hes about as intimidating as Baby Hughie. With each passing generation, there are more and more soyboys and less crazy Canadian kids like Tocchet and Behn Wilson.

 

 

Too many guys like that have cost the Flyers too many penalty minutes and suspensions.  

 

So much so that our big guys get penalized and suspended when they don’t do anything at all. 

 

We have to move on from that to win. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather have a player take a penalty being aggressive,  than the typical lazy penalties we take by not asserting an effort.  I'm not saying I want a Rinaldo or Carcillo,  but a big skilled guy who can defend his teammates and instill some fear if needed. I know the old days are over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any of the Tkachuk brothers are the style of player I would like to see on this team. You know, nobody hates our players any more. I want a player that other teams hate to play against and their fans hate. That's Flyers hockey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RonJeremy said:

It's got to be coaching, leadership and confidence.  We have guys like Lindblom and Patrick who play like blossoming stars for 10 games and then disappear for 20 games. We have vets who wait 30 games into the season to start contributing.

 

It's consistency - that's the problem. And injury. And bad bounces. And happenstance. And every other thing that means "didn't get it done."

 

The Flyers have 5 20-goal scorers. A number which almost surprised me when I counted.

 

Washington has seven. Tampa only has five, but four of them are at 39 or higher and six more at 13 or more.  The Flyers have three 13+.

 

The Flyers also have fewer goals for than any Eastern playoff team other than Carolina (who is tied with them) and the Islanders (who IMO are playoff frauds). By the same token, they've given up far more than any Eastern playoff team. That's not a good pairing.

 

Hart could have an effect there, but his GAA this season is only .04 less than Elliott's and .31 more than, say, Petr Mrazek.

 

28 minutes ago, RonJeremy said:

With each passing generation, there are more and more soyboys and less crazy Canadian kids like Tocchet and Behn Wilson.

 

You're really seeing the effect of the development of hockey training programs across the country has done for the sport. Talent level is increased, but they do represent a different type of player.

 

There's also the matter of the league not allowing the type of play we like to remember from the Tocchets and Wilsons of our memories.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, King Knut said:

 

Depth and coaching beat an amazing top six at least 4 out of 7 times. 

 

Can beat an amazing top six 4 of 7 times. If that top six has a solid goalie and a defence, they can certainly take 4 of 7. That's a big reason they play best of seven IMO.

 

I'm not sure the Islanders are going to take out the Pens, for example, and the Pens look like the poster child for "amazing top six".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Looking at those numbers, it sure looks like the second half run was really a mirage that was buoyed by above-league-average goaltending. 

 

By almost every other important metric (other than Ws and Ls lol) the Flyers were a worse team under Gordon than Hak. 

 

Very curious.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

Can beat an amazing top six 4 of 7 times. If that top six has a solid goalie and a defence, they can certainly take 4 of 7. That's a big reason they play best of seven IMO.

 

I'm not sure the Islanders are going to take out the Pens, for example, and the Pens look like the poster child for "amazing top six".

 

Let me preface this by saying that the Flyers season was over numerically and in spirit when they lost that Canes game. 

 

It it was really over when they lost to the Canadians twice  in a month, but they didn’t really give up until they were officially out of it. 

 

They have now. 

 

Anyway up until that point the shame shame is that the Flyers are I think a better team than both the Islanders and Penguins. Not just because they could beat them but because of the way they could beat them.   It that it was handily (though two of the islander games were) but based on matchups and strengths vs weaknesses.  

 

I think it’s mostly a depth thing. Depth in D especially.  Depth everywhere for the islanders who have been boxing well above their weight all year.  

 

I thinknif the Flyers made it in and drew the penguins this year, they’d likely win. 

 

Easily against the islanders.  

 

Clearly they're not there yet for the Bolts & Caps.   Frankly they should be able to take the Habs, but they were just stymied in the neutral zone against that team for some reason and they couldn’t.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

 

Looking at those numbers, it sure looks like the second half run was really a mirage that was buoyed by above-league-average goaltending. 

 

By almost every other important metric (other than Ws and Ls lol) the Flyers were a worse team under Gordon than Hak. 

 

Very curious.

 

only if you ignore hockey. 

 

The whole thing about Gordon’s d-zone system was to allow more shots, but from lower percentage areas.  This is why initially, most of the goals (like 2/3 I think) against were top ins or deflections. 

 

The whole thing about Hakstol’s system was to allow fewer shots but from right up against the side of the net with no one covering and a trailer to take the rebound.  

 

It makes for better rebound control and better outlets so more gold for and it’s why the save % went up (regardless of who was in net) despite the increase in shots.  

 

Plus they won a ton more. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, King Knut said:

I thinknif the Flyers made it in and drew the penguins this year, they’d likely win. 

 

Easily against the islanders.  

 

Right, but they're not so they won't. And it's not like they manhandled the Isles this year 2-2, 12 GF, 13 GA.

 

They are somewhat in the Pens' heads, but they also played the Pens a few times when they were men down. And two of the wins were in OT. Does the same thing happen 5v5? We obviously don't and won't know.

 

19 minutes ago, King Knut said:

Frankly they should be able to take the Habs, but they were just stymied in the neutral zone against that team for some reason and they couldn’t.

 

Again, they didn't. "Should be able to" and "actually did" are miles and miles apart.

 

And the "for some reason" could just be "not good enough."

 

8-16-4 against the current playoff teams (that's not even counting the Habs). Five of those came against the Isles and Pens. So 3-13-4 against the rest. That's a .250 win % when you take away the two teams that you say they are "better" than.

 

Winning?

 

"On paper" don't mean squat on the ice. I just want to see it on the ice before I believe the paper.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

only if you ignore hockey. 

 

The whole thing about Gordon’s d-zone system was to allow more shots, but from lower percentage areas.  This is why initially, most of the goals (like 2/3 I think) against were top ins or deflections. 

 

The whole thing about Hakstol’s system was to allow fewer shots but from right up against the side of the net with no one covering and a trailer to take the rebound.  

 

It makes for better rebound control and better outlets so more gold for and it’s why the save % went up (regardless of who was in net) despite the increase in shots.  

 

Plus they won a ton more. 

 

 

 

How so? High danger chances against have increased under Gordon.

 

Our goal production and chances and shooting percentage have all dropped under Gordon.

 

They are statistically a worse team at 5v5 under Gordon. That's all the tweet is saying.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

How so? High danger chances against have increased under Gordon.

 

Our goal production and chances and shooting percentage have all dropped under Gordon.

 

They are statistically a worse team at 5v5 under Gordon. That's all the tweet is saying.

 

 

 

High danger chances have increased because all shots have increased, but heat maps don't show you where the defense is when those shots are fired. 

 

The tweet is about numbers and not taking into account that under Hakstol High danger meant right next to the goalie with no one covering.  You don't need more of those to put them in.   You get 6 a game, you win the game.  Coverage is better and more effective under Gordon.  Shots that do come are weaker and easier to track and rebounds are easier to control because the Defense is in position to do so.  

 

The next step in developing a system for this team is to shut down the neutral zone better which will cut down on shots overall.  

 

It gets better.  Gordon and his changes aren't the end of this road.  Even he has more or less admitted that these changes are little more than a band aid, not a full system which is kinda hard to switch to on the fly mid-season.  

 

 

 

Edited by King Knut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

High danger chances have increased because all shots have increased, but heat maps don't show you where the defense is when those shots are fired. 

 

That doesn't have to be the case, though it probably is typical.

 

This has a nice analysis of it as it relates to the Devils.

https://www.allaboutthejersey.com/2018/1/10/16866162/high-danger-scoring-chances-an-analysis-of-the-devilish-statistic

 

 

10 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

The tweet is about numbers and not taking into account that under Hakstol High danger meant right next to the goalie with no one covering.  You don't need more of those to put them in.   You get 6 a game, you win the game.  Coverage is better and more effective under Gordon.  Shots that do come are weaker and easier to track and rebounds are easier to control because the Defense is in position to do so.  

 

Here's the definition of high danger area

blankdemo.0.jpg

 

Maybe coverage is better under Gordon, but it sure felt like on most nights, it's just that Hart / Elliott were better than the garbage that was trotted out under Hak. Odd man rushes, breakaways, defensive breakdowns, miscues, giveaways - they're all still there in every game. And Hart and Elliott have bailed them out.

 

No doubt they have improved some parts of their game - but man, it's still like watching a borderline NHL team on many nights. 

 

 

10 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

The next step in developing a system for this team is to shut down the neutral zone better which will cut down on shots overall.  

 

It gets better.  Gordon and his changes aren't the end of this road.  Even he has more or less admitted that these changes are little more than a band aid, not a full system which is kinda hard to switch to on the fly mid-season.  

 

 

 

 

Agreed. I think it's the end of the road for Gordon, though. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, radoran said:

 

Right, but they're not so they won't. And it's not like they manhandled the Isles this year 2-2, 12 GF, 13 GA.

 

They are somewhat in the Pens' heads, but they also played the Pens a few times when they were men down. And two of the wins were in OT. Does the same thing happen 5v5? We obviously don't and won't know.

 

 

Again, they didn't. "Should be able to" and "actually did" are miles and miles apart.

 

And the "for some reason" could just be "not good enough."

 

8-16-4 against the current playoff teams (that's not even counting the Habs). Five of those came against the Isles and Pens. So 3-13-4 against the rest. That's a .250 win % when you take away the two teams that you say they are "better" than.

 

Winning?

 

"On paper" don't mean squat on the ice. I just want to see it on the ice before I believe the paper.

 

 

I mean, they did sort of manhandle the Islanders twice after Hakstol got canned and were a +4 in goal differential in the three games after Hak was dismissed... but as I stated, my point wasn't that they killed those teams. 

 

My point was that I felt like they matched up to them well line for line and the subsequent overall compete level for 60+ minutes leads me to believe that in a 7 game series the Flyers would defeat those teams.  

 

I think part of why I brought up the "should be able to" is because it and the reality were miles apart.  I'm not sure why you felt the need to point that out.  It was inherent in my comment.  It's not like I'm saying some weird shenanigans prevented them from beating the Habs.  They got confounded by their neutral zone coverage.  They got beat by a team they are at least on paper superior to.  That's a shame.  Means they have work to do. 

 

I'm not sure why you're lecturing me on how crappy they are.  I understand you're pissed and frustrated, but the basic difference between what you're saying and what I'm saying is that you're being crabbier about it.  

 

That said, I don't know why you're even discussing any games or results from before Hakstol got fired.  That was the preseason.  

 

 

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, radoran said:

That's not a good pairing.

 

And combine that with the fact the opposition just freely enters the Flyers zone at will and once there it is like a mad scramble for the Flyers defenders...with the young defenseman not being able to decide when to cover the front of the net and when to attack the puck.

 

Then their accompanying forwards, who are suppose to be there for support, usually stand by far away from the play, seemingly looking at their fellow forwards...with the look on their face and mentally asking the other "Do you have that guy?" and the return stare of "No do you have that guy" only to be met with "No you get that guy" system it seems...

 

...all the while utter chaos is unfolding in front of whoever is manning the net...and what ends up happening?

 

Is yes...no one covered "that guy" who fires it into the back of the net.

 

Or then if Jake is one the ice he just casually skates back (i'm hoping with intentions of conserving injury for the transition back to offense) skates into the defensive zone only to circle back up and out the zone wanting someone to do the dirty work and get him the puck for the breakout which of course doesn't happen very much because the Flyers are usually outnumber with so many forwards not really doing anything there beside observing others.

 

It's maddening...over and over again.

 

Now of course in order to change a lot of this it would help if the defensemen would challenge at the blue line but after seeing their only challenge being mostly a swing of the stick at the puck which usually they whiff on 90% of the time and the skaters just goes around them unimpeded i get why they just skate backwards.

 

It will not change until the kids learn how to properly challenge and defend their end. So WTF is teaching this??

 

It looks like no one it looks as if they are being coached to concede the blueline...or maybe it is a learned skill from the fellow vet Mcdud who has mastered that skill.

 

Sorry for the long post i blame it on the coffee.

 

Will it ever change...is the question??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, brelic said:

Maybe coverage is better under Gordon, but it sure felt like on most nights, it's just that Hart / Elliott were better than the garbage that was trotted out under Hak. Odd man rushes, breakaways, defensive breakdowns, miscues, giveaways - they're all still there in every game. And Hart and Elliott have bailed them out.

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

No doubt they have improved some parts of their game - but man, it's still like watching a borderline NHL team on many nights. 

 

 

I think we're watching a wild card level NHL team or at least we were until they were eliminated and they gave up on the season two games ago.  I think the Canes, Habs, BJ's and Flyers are all playing better than the Penguins, Islanders, Maple Leafs and maybe Bruins right now.  The Canes, Habs, and BJ's are all playing better than the Flyers to be sure and that's why we're on the outside again this year... that and the first half of the season was utter garbage.   Some teams they match up well against and could take (and sometimes this happens with teams that have much better records) some teams matchup better against the Flyers even though their records are similar and some teams are just outright better.  That's pretty much the way hockey goes.  

 

3 minutes ago, brelic said:

Agreed. I think it's the end of the road for Gordon, though. 

 

As stated elsewhere, despite recent protestations to the contrary from Holmgren and a scouts honor promise the final decision is Fletcher's, I think the plan always was for this to be the end of the road for Gordon.  

 

I think it was presented as a chance for him to maybe show off and get himself an NHL job elsewhere, but they couldn't sign Q mid season, but at the same time couldn't pass up a Hall of Fame coach when he does become available.  

 

Maybe someone gives him an offer, or maybe he just goes back to LHV and keeps developing kids for the Flyers.  He will be getting some very good ones soon. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...