Nibbling a bit of Crow

[ruxpin]

11 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

The guy his 27 goals in 66 games last year. His fourth consecutive "full" season over 25 (and a sixth of 14 in 40).

 

He's shown that he can score goals over a sizeable period of time.

 

There is something to be said for "maybe it's not entirely him" in this situation?

 

I know, I know... he floats. he's terrible. he can't do anything right. Without actually crunching the numbers, I'm gonna posit that he's scored more goals than anyone on the roster over the past five years.

 

What is it that they "can't get him going" this year?

 

Darned if I know.  I mean, all valid points, but he really did play with Hayes and Jake for quite a few games, and the whole line suffered (not necessarily because of JVR, just that it didn't work).

 

On the power play, I don't know what the issue is. But I think there is where they have to "get him going" rather than the 5v5 line.  If he starts seeing some results on the PP, I think that will bleed into some confidence 5v5 regardless of who he's with.

 

I know the recent goals were when we were up 5-1 already.  I didn't see the one the other night, but the one against Toronto wasn't a garbage goal.  Yeah, we were up 5-1 so it was garbage time but that was a legit goal.  So maybe the issue really is in his head.  Clearly there was no external pressure on that goal against Toronto. He was just able to go in and do his thing.  I don't know, it just leaves me to believe that some, if not most, of the scoring issues are mental/confidence.  He's always been somewhat streaky, though, so he may have always had some of that.   Like, some success begets more success but it wears off and disappears only to repeat the cycle later.

 

But if he's playing sound hockey otherwise on the fourth line, keep him there until he starts feeling it on the PP and then maybe move him back up.

[Podein25]

27 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

the whole line suffered (not necessarily because of JVR)

 

LOL, as if.

[radoran]

52 minutes ago, elmatus said:

Asking a consistent 45pt guy to suddenly bump that up to say 60pts without the benefit of a very good player on his line seems like bad expectations to me.

 

I get that. And said as much when he was signed. Advocates of the signing seemed to be among those expecting the bump to a 20/50 or 20/60 player. I was skeptical for the reasons you ably outline but willing to see what the player brought.

 

The point I would make is that JVR is a "pretty good player" was put on his line. To have that good player - a goal scorer who has consistently put up 25+ per year for the past six (including one projection) - not be made better and not making Hayes better is a not insubstantial point of concern.

 

And it's a concern similar to that which made Winnipeg walk away after giving up essentially two first rounders for him.

[radoran]

54 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

he really did play with Hayes and Jake for quite a few games, and the whole line suffered (not necessarily because of JVR, just that it didn't work).

 

Which brings me back to it might "not be all on him." The two guys you mention don't have a terribly good track record of making players around them better.

 

Jake's "on pace" for 58 - which would be his lowest (projected) point total since his first year in Philadelphia. Hayes, I am reliably told and can easily see, has a history as a 40-point center who is on pace for 23 goals and 17 assists this year.

 

And you're saying it didn't work? Who coulda knowed?

[ruxpin]

Just now, radoran said:

 

And you're saying it didn't work? Who coulda knowed?

 

LOL  Yeah, I think that was predictable going in and didn't like it at all.

 

I think we actually pretty much agree (which makes sense, considering).  I can't fathom what the options are, but I'm not sure Jake and JVR actually fit the team anymore.  I don't have answers if that's the case, and I think the Flyers just need to find a way to make them work.   The stated reason from AV was to let the three vets figure themselves out, but it seems to me it was throwing square pegs against round holes and saying "let the pegs figure it out."  Also, I imagine, it was quarantining them from other lines for awhile to see what else worked.

 

I'm not advocating moving them.  We've been down that rabbit hole, and I don't think the options are there.   I don't like messing up lines that seem to be working to "figure it out," but sometimes you have to mess up 3 perfectly completed sides of the Rubix Cube to get to where 6 sides are completed. 

[Podein25]

18 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

I'm not sure Jake and JVR actually fit the team anymore. 

 

This is a good point. They don't fit and it is glaringly obvious.  It's up to them, especially as individuals making that kind of coin, along with the coaching staff, to try to get them to fit into the lineup and the "vibe" of the team, which is suddenly very young. You can see this with Jake. He's trying to be a leader, you can see him on the bench telling the kids how to play - I noticed it last game, he was kind of barking at someone, Lindblom maybe. Anyway, I remember thinking: dude, just shut up and play.

 

[CoachX]

Rux:

 

Good post. Well delivered. 

 

Im still thinking about it in what i consider the simplest form. Two players with huge contracts, not delivering whats expected. This is JVRs second stint and neither saw him as a dominant player. Voracek has been given every opportunity. 

 

Like you, I dont know how, but its time to move on. I dont see this team being serious contenders with those two guys being seen as  significant players. And isnt being a contender the goal here?

Edited December 5, 2019 by CoachX

[mkscrewy]

[ruxpin]

33 minutes ago, Podein25 said:

 

This is a good point. They don't fit and it is glaringly obvious.  It's up to them, especially as individuals making that kind of coin, along with the coaching staff, to try to get them to fit into the lineup and the "vibe" of the team, which is suddenly very young. You can see this with Jake. He's trying to be a leader, you can see him on the bench telling the kids how to play - I noticed it last game, he was kind of barking at someone, Lindblom maybe. Anyway, I remember thinking: dude, just shut up and play.

 

 

I agree.  But what if we're asking ducks to be...I don't know, something other than a duck.    I mean no pejorative by duck, either.   I keep thinking about what rad said.

 

1 hour ago, radoran said:

Which brings me back to it might "not be all on him."

 

Maybe it's NOT all on him.  He might be a very good puzzle piece, but with all  "male" connectors (to cross metaphors, and again no pejorative intended) and he simply doesn't go with the parts around him.   He could be moved and fit in very well with those around him on team X and there will be those of us saying "we should have kept him instead of trading for Gomer!"

 

I don't even think it's necessarily a chemistry or locker room thing.  I've never heard anything to base that on.   I just think maybe it's a playing style thing that, constitutionally, doesn't work.

 

While they are here, though, it's up to them --along with the coaching staff, as you say--to try to get them to fit.   Even if it strips the screw (just how many crossed metaphors can one stick in a single post, anyway?).

 

I just think they're Pontiac parts trying to fit on a Honda.  (at least 4 metaphors, apparently).

Edited December 5, 2019 by ruxpin

[Podein25]

6 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

I agree.  But what if we're asking ducks to be...I don't know, something other than a duck.    I mean no pejorative by duck, either.   I keep thinking about what rad said.

 

 

Maybe it's NOT all on him.  He might be a very good puzzle piece, but with all  "male" connectors (to cross metaphors, and again no pejorative intended) and he simply doesn't go with the parts around him.   He could be moved and fit in very well with those around him on team X and there will be those of us saying "we should have kept him instead of trading for Gomer!"

 

I don't even think it's necessarily a chemistry or locker room thing.  I've never heard anything to base that on.   I just think maybe it's a playing style thing that, constitutionally, doesn't work.

 

While they are here, though, it's up to them --along with the coaching staff, as you say--to try to get them to fit.   Even if it strips the screw (just how many crossed metaphors can one stick in a single post, anyway?).

 

I just think they're Pontiac parts trying to fit on a Honda.  (at least 4 metaphors, apparently).

 

Lol, it's like reading Joyce your posts sometimes

[elmatus]

7 hours ago, radoran said:

I get that. And said as much when he was signed. Advocates of the signing seemed to be among those expecting the bump to a 20/50 or 20/60 player. I was skeptical for the reasons you ably outline but willing to see what the player brought.

 

 

Sure, to be fair, I was an advocate of his signing. I still think he's a great player to have on the roster. 45pts isn't nothing, and he brings solid possession play and defensive acumen, both of which are things great teams tend to have. The contract for Hayes is not good, but I'm plenty fine with the player, at least for this season and likely the next couple as well.

 

I do absolutely think the contract will become an albatross in a few seasons though. At some point, he will be the new MacDonald. That's the sad reality of it. But for 19-20, 20-21, 21-22 or so, he should be a solid addition to give this team very important depth.

 

It's also worth noting that if the team somehow wins a cup in that time, the overpayment will seem much more worth it.

 

7 hours ago, radoran said:

The point I would make is that JVR is a "pretty good player" was put on his line. To have that good player - a goal scorer who has consistently put up 25+ per year for the past six (including one projection) - not be made better and not making Hayes better is a not insubstantial point of concern.

 

 

JVR is a garbage shoveler. He's good at standing in front of the net and shoveling in whatever garbage pops on to his stick. He's not the kind of guy who makes Hayes into a 60pt player unfortunately. To do that would require a Giroux, but we really only have one of those, and he's doing fine where he's at.

Edited December 6, 2019 by elmatus

[mojo1917]

On 12/5/2019 at 8:47 AM, Digityman said:

Although I've read some concern about Patrick coming back, I honestly can't wait.  At this point I have complete confidence in this coaching staff to know how to bring Patrick back into the fold.   I'm not worried that he will throw the team into an imbalance.

I've thought this as well.

 

I think Patrick makes the team stronger provided he's available regularly. That's the goal so I also don't mind the med staff taking their time to get his situation right.

 

A thing I recently learned about migranes is about 80 % of cases are a result of scalp and facial muscle tension,  and many times therapy that teaches coping and relaxation skills is as good a "prescription" as meds are.  I know 0 % of Patrick's situation so really that sentence was a "the more you know" moment. I was surprised and think it says things about our culture overall that people are holding their faces so tight they give themselves debilitating headaches...I digress.

 

I like the thought of having a big punky shooter playing with Raffl and Pitlick. That line would hella suck to play against and with Patty's skill which I know Raffl will benefit from see: time playing with Giroux,  they could mark up the score sheet some...It could realistically be the Flyers version of the Staal, Cooke and Kennedy from the Pens....that was the line that won the first two cups. Teams could play Malkin and Crosby to a draw or minus one but then Blysma put out Staal's line especially after a Pens goal and they would grind the **** out of any attempt to get the goal back.  18. 19 & 12 could do that for the Flyers.

 

I think a healthy Patrick makes this team very good. 

 

[OccamsRazor]

1 hour ago, mojo1917 said:

I think a healthy Patrick makes this team very good. 

 

But if Patrick comes back there won't be any room for Pitlick.

 

Are you saying scratch Farabee or Frost?

 

If it's JVR I can agree with that.

 

Giroux-Frost-TK

Lindy-Coots-Jake

Laughton-Hayes-Farabee

Raffl-Patrick-Pitlick

JVR

 

Scratch a 7 mill player to send a message I can get behind that.

 

But I have like the play of the other lines to much to mess with anything right now.

 

It is nice to see Laughton find a home on the 3rd line LW spot with Hayes and Joel.

 

 

[mojo1917]

@OccamsRazor

 

Correct I don't change 

93 14 23

28 48 11

49 13 21

 

All those lines work....

So, if JvR turns into a 7mm aav 13th forward...I hope he can be as cool as Chris Stewart has been.

Trade him outta here if the deal is good or to do him a solid...but I don't think he's been as bad as "many people" ® Donald J Trump  have been saying. I think his game is 75 ft and he needs a certain set of linemates to "fill it up". I don't think he can "get his own shot". Whether that's because of "want to" or "can't anymore" I don't know. He's not a guy that lifts his teammates play even if he is a good dude/mentor.

 

Having a lot of good players is such an nice problem to have.

I like not having to talk myself into Dale Weisse, and late stage Matt Read.

 

 

Edited December 6, 2019 by mojo1917

[radoran]

15 hours ago, elmatus said:

Sure, to be fair, I was an advocate of his signing. I still think he's a great player to have on the roster. 45pts isn't nothing, and he brings solid possession play and defensive acumen, both of which are things great teams tend to have. The contract for Hayes is not good, but I'm plenty fine with the player, at least for this season and likely the next couple as well.

 

I'm absolutely "fine" with it, but would say that 45 points is not what I'm looking for from a "second line center" (ostensibly his role). As a third line center - which is where he seems to be slotted - he works fine. He does what you need that role to do. I'm leery of a $7M third line center just from the perspective of health of the league and the likelihood of an impending lockout.

 

If you can get 20-goal scorers in 7-8 of your top 9 that's a "good problem to have."

 

To be clear, I wasn't saying you as an advocate were saying he could be a 50-60 point player, just that there are/were a lot of people who said it (and rux, for example, was implying that his recent burst of points was an example).

 

15 hours ago, elmatus said:

JVR is a garbage shoveler. He's good at standing in front of the net and shoveling in whatever garbage pops on to his stick. He's not the kind of guy who makes Hayes into a 60pt player unfortunately.

 

That's what a lot of 30-goal players are. You need those guys. It's how Simmonds did it. It's how LeClair got three straight 50-goal seasons. It's how high-assist guys rack up those primary and secondary points.

 

The really nice thing is that goals are goals. They all count.

 

I'm not sure what makes Hayes into a 60-point player. I certainly don't expect it. But, again, if he can score 20 on the third line and play his defensively-responsible/PK game, it should work fine.

[elmatus]

2 hours ago, radoran said:

I'm absolutely "fine" with it, but would say that 45 points is not what I'm looking for from a "second line center" (ostensibly his role). As a third line center - which is where he seems to be slotted - he works fine. He does what you need that role to do. I'm leery of a $7M third line center just from the perspective of health of the league and the likelihood of an impending lockout.

 

 

Yeah, and I agree with you for sure. I remember going from "oh, sweet, we got the rights to Hayes" to "yeah okay that contract is a hot mess" in pretty short order, precisely because I felt we were clearly overpaying for what he brings to a team.

 

I do think he could be a 2nd line center (albeit a 45-50pt one), but Frost has been doing well so far, and frankly he has more upside than Hayes, so it makes sense to have Hayes at 3C given the circumstances. But something could happen, and he could be called upon to play the 2C role, and I think it's a good thing to have a guy like him who could play that spot without seeming out of place.

 

By and away, I think the biggest challenge with Hayes is just that folks had unrealistic expectations of what he would bring. 7M for seven years in a locked NMC contract is a major deal that imo should only be reserved for guys who can live up to the term and provide solid production. Hayes is not really that guy, so the challenge of expectations vs reality becomes a problem.

 

Again though, I do like him as a player and like what he brings. And if the team makes a cup run in the next bit while he's still a solid guy to have around, that would go a long way towards making me feel better about the contract, flaws and all.

[OccamsRazor]

2 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

He's not a guy that lifts his teammates play even if he is a good dude/mentor.

 

And this is the part that makes it hard to move him....when your goal scorer isn't scoring and as you said above....well i hope he makes good popcorn.

 

I mean it's possible you can find a bottom feeder to take him on....but it seems like they will be stuck with him till the offseason.

 

He could be a trade deadline rental if he didn't have such a lengthy contract....so up to the press box he goes.

 

But they don't have to worry about it now while Raffl and Patrick are out.

[Digityman]

3 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

But if Patrick comes back there won't be any room for Pitlick.

 

Are you saying scratch Farabee or Frost?

I have no problem scratching anyone that isn't playing up to their abilities.  

Whoever is bringing the most to the team, plays.  Simple as that really. 

[OccamsRazor]

14 minutes ago, elmatus said:

By and away, I think the biggest challenge with Hayes is just that folks had unrealistic expectations of what he would bring.

 

And realistically he is exactly what AV envisioned i think, someone to come in and SHOW his new teammates what he expects from them.

 

The 200 foot game.....his principles rely on this to stop the other team from scoring and then retrieve the puck and get the transition going into the offensive zone to generate their own chances.

 

Because of two main reasons the other team can't score without the goal and neither can the Flyers so if you have the puck at least you should get your chances...sort of just like last night's loss...the Yotes got the lucky bounces and the Flyers didn't but overall the Flyers played well dicated play and did everything they needed to do but score.

 

And when i say they did everything they needed to do doesn't mean they still can't be better...but i think if they play like that every night they win 9 times out of 10....hockey sometimes you get the bounces and sometimes you don't and last night loss wasn't the Flyers night.

 

AV and his coaches want everyone rowing in the boat...no room for passengers....and right now they currently only have two passengers.

 

That is a huge improvement from what we saw last year....i can't wait till the two passengers are jettisoned.

[Clarke2Leach]

On 12/4/2019 at 2:17 PM, radoran said:

 

Having three NHL head coaches is certainly better than none.

 

But I'm also thinking that things like 79, 9, 15, 23, 48, 49, and 11 have something to do with it, too. And I'll throw some love to 21.

 

14 is 14 is 14 - and that's a Good Thing.  If 53, 6, 25, and 13 get going it would certainly help.

 

28's coming along. We'll see about ol' 93, though...

[OccamsRazor]

12 minutes ago, Digityman said:

I have no problem scratching anyone that isn't playing up to their abilities.  

 

I think AV doesn't either he has proven that so far i think by sliding JVR and Jake down the lineup when need be (and JVR is still there) and even scratching Ghost.

 

It was what never carried weight with Hakstol is he would always expect the kids to be perfect and let the vets (who are suppose to guide and set examples) slide and makes excuses for them.

 

And that right there in my mind is ass backwards. AV carries weight because he seems to say "I don't give a F**K who you are you are going to play my way or you want play period.

 

Bravo...all i want accountability i have it on my job athletes shouldn't be any different...wins is all that matter.

[OccamsRazor]

On 12/5/2019 at 1:29 PM, mkscrewy said:

 

 

@RonJeremy

 

Let me know when you get these T-shirts printed up i want one...

[CoachX]

1 minute ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

@RonJeremy

 

Let me know when you get these T-shirts printed up i want one...

I was just gonna respond to your last post with "punish that ass"

 

It seriously applies in all situations.....the perfect response

[OccamsRazor]

38 minutes ago, CoachX said:

I was just gonna respond to your last post with "punish that ass"

 

It seriously applies in all situations.....the perfect response