Leadership Quotes

[mojo1917]

11 hours ago, CoachX said:

. But I am suggesting his silence can be taken two ways. Im not blaming him for a loss here or there, but in the face of the same lackluster performances we've seen for season after season, i tend to believe he is more a part of the problem than he is a solution.

We disagree about this, show me how this team is better without 28's production and willingness to play wherever and do whatever is asked of him.

I think there are all kinds of ways to be a leader.

Now I'm not in the room or around the team, so I've only seen the Flyers curated image of the locker room. In that I've seen this guy make sure the young rookie goaltender is good after having a terrible night, I've seen a guy speak up between periods about how to attack an opponent, I've seen a guy keep the young guys loose in the pregame...I've seen a guy that appears to  be genuine. 

 

I wouldn't want him to be someone he's not, and ripping his teammates in the press hasn't been his jam to date.

We've heard him say "we've got to be better" how many times ? So allowing other guys in the leadership group say that line makes him complicit of not caring or shows weakness ?

 

As for his on ice performance this year, it is not great compared to recent seasons.

Could be age catching up could be Gavin keeping him awake, who knows even in a down year he's still top 5 on the team in points.

 

I think a good leader lifts those around them and gives those they lead agency to make decisions on their own to make the "whatever" better. That's how I do it when I have the opportunity. It works to varying degrees dependent upon who's on the team and what we're trying to accomplish. Those are my beliefs and how I choose to lead, I'd rather use carrots than sticks, when I have to be all stick I'm nearly as effective because it's not who I am.

I don't know enough about Claude's situation to know how he does it, but it appears that he doesn't pretend to be someone he's not and that he cares about his guys.  

 

 

 

 

[CoachX]

I dont advocate or condone a captain ripping teammates in the press. Im not suggesting that. But I wouldn't mind an occasional comment where he takes responsibility, or call out the team as a whole. He has been a great player, one of my favorites. Thats factually obvious. But I dont see his play this year as a lead by example effort. Couple that with his silence, and it makes me wonder how effective he is?

 

of course the teem would not be better without him. You can say the same about a handful of players. The only way this is a valid argument is if we are talking about trading or releasing him. And we arent, that would be dumb. But I don't buy into the POV about him being 5th on the team in scoring. What if the team as a whole is rated near the bottom of the league? Then he would be 5th best on a team that has a sucky offense. I expect him to be in the top 2 or 3 in team scoring, and among the overall league leaders. In short, I expect him to be giving the effort and results we see in TK.

 

Im still not saying  he should be removed. But I am saying he should elevate his game and bee the guy you are arguing he is

[OccamsRazor]

1 hour ago, mojo1917 said:

28's production and willingness to play wherever and do whatever is asked of him.

 

Well not sure how true it is about his willingness to play wherever he is wanted i remember this season a few weeks ago they wanted to try JVR on the top line to help get him going and put Giroux on the right wing between Coots and he didn't want to move off the left wing.

 

I mean he played RW almost all of junior if not all and now to help the team he won't move to the right side sounds selfish to me.

[mojo1917]

4 minutes ago, CoachX said:

What if the team as a whole is rated near the bottom of the league? Then he would be 5th best on a team that has a sucky offense. I expect him to be in the top 2 or 3 in team scoring, and among the overall league leaders. In short, I expect him to be giving the effort and results we see in TK.

Well, the team is not, they are top 10 in the league in points. They're actually having a pretty good year, true story. This is a rough patch no question, and as long as the bad games don't turn into 3 or 4 in a row I don't know how much of this discussion is tempest in a teacup.

 

With 28 I see effort, I don't see the results. Same with 49.

Sometimes it's bad luck sometimes it's a good save, maybe like i said 28's lost a step...I don't see how his repeating a platitude to the press makes him a better leader or player.  I also think he's said plenty regarding poor play. 

 

If you think he's the problem - I've learned that I'm not changing your mind during this discussion.

I will continue to think this is a bad opinion that is based on something you're seeing or not seeing. This discussion and it's point of contention is why you can't rely on eyewitnesses alone.

 

 

[mojo1917]

23 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

Well not sure how true it is about his willingness to play wherever he is wanted i remember this season a few weeks ago they wanted to try JVR on the top line to help get him going and put Giroux on the right wing between Coots and he didn't want to move off the left wing.

 

I mean he played RW almost all of junior if not all and now to help the team he won't move to the right side sounds selfish to me.

 

 

What I was referencing is that he played #1 C for years , not his natural position, played on the penalty kill, then moved back to wing, then moved off the left half wall on the PP this year. This selfishness you're reporting is news to me. 

 

I don't know OR would you move him to get JvR going ? what's the sum gain ? lose the ++ shot from 28's strong side to gain JvR's 2 moves? Is that better for the team ? What is JvR's scoring ceiling ?  Is this a case of questions we know the answers to don't need to be asked ?

 

[Podein25]

17 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

- I've learned that I'm not changing your mind during this discussion.

 

Lol, but you put up a gallant effort. 

[Podein25]

7 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

Is this a case of questions we know the answers to don't need to be asked ?

 

Known knowns

[OccamsRazor]

5 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

 

I don't know OR would you move him to get JvR going ?

 

Sure if i'm the Captain you must sacrifice for the sake of the team.

 

Team goals ahead of personal ones especially to help get a friend going??

 

Yes most Captain would.

 

6 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

Is that better for the team ?

 

We''ll never know Giroux didn't acquiesce.

 

7 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

What is JvR's scoring ceiling ?

 

Well he is a 30 goal scorer and when a team is struggling to score goals getting him going should be key.

 

Giroux is not a goal scorer right one goal in the last 6 games is not a goal scorer. So as i said getting my 30 goal scorer going should help ease the burden on the whole team especially when this was Lindblom and TK were out the lineup.

[mojo1917]

23 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

Sure if i'm the Captain you must sacrifice for the sake of the team.

 

Team goals ahead of personal ones especially to help get a friend going??

 

Yes most Captain would.

 

 

We''ll never know Giroux didn't acquiesce.

 

 

Well he is a 30 goal scorer and when a team is struggling to score goals getting him going should be key.

 

Giroux is not a goal scorer right one goal in the last 6 games is not a goal scorer. So as i said getting my 30 goal scorer going should help ease the burden on the whole team especially when this was Lindblom and TK were out the lineup.

These are decent points.

I'm having trouble believing you didn't throw up in your mouth typing them especially writing anything complimentary to JvR.

 

Like I said I hadn't heard about the situation you're referencing, and was basing my  point on past sacrifices and moves.

Maybe Giroux's over it, **** it, it was a good run

 

 

[King Knut]

On 12/29/2019 at 2:10 PM, OccamsRazor said:

 

Well some of his comments are the obvious type comments but many players make those I just think he is a better lead by example type and that is what I want the talking stuff not so much worried about of of them give lip service.

 

I want the Flyers Captain to be a heart and sould type go out there and show type of guy.

 

He is the closest they have to that type.

 

The other in my mind is TK but I feel he is ready for that.

 

Ivan wouldn't be bad either but I want a vet type too.

 

And those two are still kids.

 

So who is your out the box guy then?

 

Yeah, I agree with the sentiment on G's Silence and Coot's textbook answers, but I really don't think it matters who says what to the press and the conversations that do matter don't make it to us.

 

That's not meant as a defense of any player or a contradiction to any assessment here.  Rather just to say we really don't know.  There's more to being a captain than getting the guys going. 

 

I know that's our perception of the role because of... I'm actually not sure why.  But There's no rule in any locker room that says a guy without a C on his uniform can't speak up and encourage or criticize his fellow guys.  

 

For me this goes back to the Pronger / Richards thing.  Pronger had a bee in his bonnet that he wasn't the captain.  That's fine.  He's kind of a legendary figure in this so I don't actually begrudge him that.  

 

But if he didn't yap at his team mates or give speeches in the locker room that might have encouraged his team mates or if he didn't give advice or tips to his team mates that might have helped them win that G.D. cup, then there's no excuse for that and certainly "well, Richie was the captain!" isn't one of them.  Sorry.  Nope.  Uh uh. 

 

Way back when, I was highly against giving G the Captaincy.  But not because he wasn't vocal.  It was because I wanted him to focus on scoring as many points as possible.  Because that was his skill set and the Flyers really never encourage that skill set.  

 

Of course you want him to "play the right way" and a "200 ft. Game" and all of that, but at the end of the day, I didn't want Giroux to have to worry about all the B.S. minutia that a captain has to worry about (It's dumb, but there is an actual job he has to do during games that has nothing to do with calling out his team mates).  And I didn't want him to have the pressure of hearing about how he wasn't being vocal enough or a good enough leader in the press.  

 

After Pronger went down, to me it made the most sense to give it to Briere or Timmonen.  I don't know why that didn't happen.  Even if they knew they wanted to buy out Briere once the compliance buyouts were offered, who cares?  They didn't bring back Smith and he was an excellent captain for this team.  So if not them, then I'd have said resign and give it to Jagr even though he got tired in the playoffs because he was old or whatever. But Homer in his infinite wisdom didn't think he was worth two years at his age (once again something Homer was proven irrevocably wrong on).

 

Even Talbot or Knuble would have been better choices for the role as far as I was concerned and when they brought back Gagne, then they should have given it to him.  

 

But that's all a tangent.  My point is if Steady Eddie or Hazy have stuff to say, then there is NOTHING holding them back and I am willing to bet two whole coke-a-colas after da game that they say everything they think they should during and after and before the games.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

[King Knut]

3 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

These are decent points.

I'm having trouble believing you didn't throw up in your mouth typing them especially writing anything complimentary to JvR.

 

Like I said I hadn't heard about the situation you're referencing, and was basing my  point on past sacrifices and moves.

Maybe Giroux's over it, **** it, it was a good run

 

 

 

30 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

Sure if i'm the Captain you must sacrifice for the sake of the team.

 

Team goals ahead of personal ones especially to help get a friend going??

 

Yes most Captain would.

 

 

We''ll never know Giroux didn't acquiesce.

 

 

Well he is a 30 goal scorer and when a team is struggling to score goals getting him going should be key.

 

Giroux is not a goal scorer right one goal in the last 6 games is not a goal scorer. So as i said getting my 30 goal scorer going should help ease the burden on the whole team especially when this was Lindblom and TK were out the lineup.

 

The other point I'd like to make is that (sorry Occam, no pun intended) I don't think we're seeing the simpler solution.  

 

They are a dominant home team despite the fact that we keep hearing about how there are so many empty seats.

They are a pretty bad road team.

 

To me the simplest solution is that not having that control of the matchups is taking a toll on them.  Maybe they don't like hotels, maybe they drink too much on the plane, maybe G misses his bride and baby and maybe, they're jet lagged... or maybe teams are just getting the matchups they want instead of AV getting the matchups he wants.  

 

The fact that they've been playing through so many injuries and don't have the depth that they had when they were really hitting their strike bears this out to me.   

 

I think teams are simply able to exploit the Flyers weaknesses the way they want to.  

 

The Kings game doesn't bear this out simply because so many of the goals were on special teams. But the Sharks game certainly does.  

 

 

 

 

[CoachX]

I really didnt mean for this discussion to morph into a specific person issue. I think Giroux is still a top player going through a slow start, on a team in an adjustment period. I still like him as the captain.

 

My point was intended to comment on how the new regime appears to be going one way, and the old is hanging on to the same 'ol song and dance that has been unsuccessful. AV has a firm grip on the leadership role and I see stark differences in the message, accountability, and overall team success. That said, if certain players don't adapt and start performing, I expect we will see significant changes.

[OccamsRazor]

22 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

I'm having trouble believing you didn't throw up in your mouth typing them especially writing anything complimentary to JvR.

 

I didn't really compliment him did i?? I just trying in my mind to get this lump of sh it going...consistently i mean he has the tools but getting him to perform on a nightly basis especially when they need some goal is all that is on my mind.

 

And best case scenario Seattle plucks him off their hands because he performs well.

 

And well if they get more goals leading to more wins i'll take it.

[Podein25]

5 minutes ago, CoachX said:

I really didnt mean for this discussion to morph into a specific person issue. I

 

You shoulda thought of that about 30 posts ago you big dummy 

[CoachX]

I can't be held responsible for well my forum teammates respond/don't respond. And I cant be judged on how vocal I am/am not

 

Im not the captain

[OccamsRazor]

27 minutes ago, King Knut said:

There's more to being a captain than getting the guys going. 

 

Yes there is.

 

My thing is the example on the ice and there have been more than a few times i have seen him glide back into the D zone backchecking instead of giving max effort to get back....things we put JVR and Jake on blast for and well when those guys see the Captain do it to me it sends a bad message or sets a bad example....and then a goal goes in when Giroux should have put more effort into picking up trailing guys...well that chaps my ass when the other team outworks you and shows more effort to get to the puck.

 

It needs to change...and i'm not just cherry picking a time he did it he has done it a few times this year so what gives why does he think he is above the expectations??? You can't ask the JVRs and Jake to do it if the leader doesn't even do it.

 

Accountability....to everyone.

[OccamsRazor]

18 minutes ago, CoachX said:

I really didnt mean for this discussion to morph into a specific person issue

 

REPORTED!

[radoran]

10 minutes ago, King Knut said:

They are a dominant home team despite the fact that we keep hearing about how there are so many empty seats.

They are a pretty bad road team.

 

To me the simplest solution is that not having that control of the matchups is taking a toll on them. 

 

There's no doubt that last change is a significant part of the situation.

 

I'd offer another about the "dominant" home team - they haven't played a lot of "good" teams at home so far.

 

Teams with fewer points rightnow: CLS (W), CGY (L), MON (W), ARI (L), OTT (W), ANH (W), BUF (W), NYR (W), VAN (W), DET (W)

 

Teams with more/same points rightnow: DAL (L), VGK (W), TOR (L), CAR (W), WAS (L), NYI (L), TOR (W),

 

That's a lot of Ws against teams with fewer points than them and a losing record against teams with the same or more points (this is going off Yahoo's Schedule which doesn't immediately show whether it's an OTL).

 

Couple that with the problems with matchups you identify on the road  and that they just went 1-2 against the bottom three teams in the West. If those sorts of teams can exploit matchups this doesn't bode well for getting out of the first round without home ice advantage (presuming they hold on to the 8 seed and/or improve).

 

Things are definitely "better" but there is a lot more to improve upon.

 

[CoachX]

5 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

There's no doubt that last change is a significant part of the situation.

 

I'd offer another about the "dominant" home team - they haven't played a lot of "good" teams at home so far.

 

Teams with fewer points rightnow: CLS (W), CGY (L), MON (W), ARI (L), OTT (W), ANH (W), BUF (W), NYR (W), VAN (W), DET (W)

 

Teams with more/same points rightnow: DAL (L), VGK (W), TOR (L), CAR (W), WAS (L), NYI (L), TOR (W),

 

That's a lot of Ws against teams with fewer points than them and a losing record against teams with the same or more points (this is going off Yahoo's Schedule which doesn't immediately show whether it's an OTL).

 

Couple that with the problems with matchups you identify on the road  and that they just went 1-2 against the bottom three teams in the West. If those sorts of teams can exploit matchups this doesn't bode well for getting out of the first round without home ice advantage (presuming they hold on to the 8 seed and/or improve).

 

Things are definitely "better" but there is a lot more to improve upon.

 

to your poitt, I seem to recall another embarrassment earlier this season to the ****** penguins

[radoran]

1 minute ago, CoachX said:

to your poitt, I seem to recall another embarrassment earlier this season to the ****** penguins

 

You obviously have to beat the teams you play - but you're also going to have to consistently beat "better" teams at some point if you want to win in the postseason.

 

And you show you are the better team when you do.

[King Knut]

27 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

There's no doubt that last change is a significant part of the situation.

 

I'd offer another about the "dominant" home team - they haven't played a lot of "good" teams at home so far.

 

Teams with fewer points rightnow: CLS (W), CGY (L), MON (W), ARI (L), OTT (W), ANH (W), BUF (W), NYR (W), VAN (W), DET (W)

 

Teams with more/same points rightnow: DAL (L), VGK (W), TOR (L), CAR (W), WAS (L), NYI (L), TOR (W),

 

That's a lot of Ws against teams with fewer points than them and a losing record against teams with the same or more points (this is going off Yahoo's Schedule which doesn't immediately show whether it's an OTL).

 

Couple that with the problems with matchups you identify on the road  and that they just went 1-2 against the bottom three teams in the West. If those sorts of teams can exploit matchups this doesn't bode well for getting out of the first round without home ice advantage (presuming they hold on to the 8 seed and/or improve).

 

Things are definitely "better" but there is a lot more to improve upon.

 

 

I mean 2 home losses at this point in the season is a bit more than just playing bad teams.  

 

But you’ve got a good point and both our points are likely contributors.  

 

Losing to bad  west coast teams this badly though... that’s got to stop.  They’ve got to have the tools for that. 

[radoran]

3 minutes ago, King Knut said:

I mean 2 home losses at this point in the season is a bit more than just playing bad teams.  

 

Well, that's why the caveat for just W/L - and I believe we know the operative word in "overtime loss" meaning there's six home "losses."

 

There are also no "loser" points in the playoffs.

 

Like I said to Coach, you have to play the teams on the schedule and they've had success with it. That said, I'd like to see how they do in the crunch on a playoff push. For example, March with home games against CAR, BOS, EDM, STL, NYI, PIT (and BUF, MIN).

 

For that matter, they've got WAS, TB, BOS, PIT on the home schedule this month (along with MON and LA).

 

If they can maintain the .789 home points percentage (13-2-4) they just might get that first round home ice.