Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 151 of 153 FirstFirst ... 51101141149150151152153 LastLast
Results 2,251 to 2,265 of 2292

Thread: Offseason

  1. #2251
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    7,846
    Quote Originally Posted by txravis12 View Post
    I cant keep reading this "tank" nonsense.


    Tanking, by definition is INTENTIONALLY being BAD.

    What we watched the last 5 years was far from an attempt at tanking. It was an attempt to stay relevant and wait for contracts to clear and prospects to develop while maintaining a strong bottom line.



    If you think what the Flyers just did was an attempt at tanking, you should probably be furious with how terrible they were.
    They were intentionally bad, and based on my post history, I hated it but understood it

  2. #2252
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,921
    They were intentionally bad, and based on my post history, I hated it but understood it
    this just isn't true.

    the flyers weren't "bad"; they were "mediocre".
    what hextall did wasn't "intentional"; it was "incidental".
    I thought you did a typo earlier in one of your posts when you put laughton on the third line but you did it again here. Lindblom will NOT play on the 4th line lol. If anything, lindblom and JVR will interchange throughout the season on the 2nd/3rd line.
    the reason i have laughton on the 3rd line is because i think it makes the team better defensively (also because i still hold out hope that the flyers can sign brian boyle or riley sheahan to center the 4th line).

    this kind stuff is fluid. lines will change a dozen times between the start of training camp and the start of the season. i think the key difference this year is that none of our options are bad. moving forward, if we call up farabee later in the year, our forward corps will look something like:

    giroux - couturier - konecny
    farabee - hayes - voracek
    JVR - patrick - frost
    lindblom - laughton - raffl

    -- now you're having a youth movement:
    five players 23 or younger
    couturier, hayes and laughton are 25-27
    JVR, giroux and voracek are rounding 30, but they're still productive, and everyone else has legs.


    -- and the same thing is true with the D corps:
    provorov, sanheim and myers are 23
    hagg is 24
    ghost is 26



    these are prime years.

  3. #2253
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    7,846
    Quote Originally Posted by steagles View Post
    this just isn't true.

    the flyers weren't "bad"; they were "mediocre".
    what hextall did wasn't "intentional"; it was "incidental".

    the reason i have laughton on the 3rd line is because i think it makes the team better defensively (also because i still hold out hope that the flyers can sign brian boyle or riley sheahan to center the 4th line).

    this kind stuff is fluid. lines will change a dozen times between the start of training camp and the start of the season. i think the key difference this year is that none of our options are bad. moving forward, if we call up farabee later in the year, our forward corps will look something like:

    giroux - couturier - konecny
    farabee - hayes - voracek
    JVR - patrick - frost
    lindblom - laughton - raffl

    -- now you're having a youth movement:
    five players 23 or younger
    couturier, hayes and laughton are 25-27
    JVR, giroux and voracek are rounding 30, but they're still productive, and everyone else has legs.


    -- and the same thing is true with the D corps:
    provorov, sanheim and myers are 23
    hagg is 24
    ghost is 26



    these are prime years.
    The flyers were mediocre, but they were intentionally not improved upon in FA or Trades ... we moved Schenn in his prime for a future 1st round pick. They were not incidentally anything. Fletcher has made about as many trades already as Hexy did. Hexy intentionally did nothing because the team was assessed as never going to be able to get there, and rebuild through the draft over 7 years.

    You can’t incidentally not sign anyone or trade for anyone to improve. That is all intent. Therefore, Tank.

  4. #2254
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    4,474
    Quote Originally Posted by castan_b View Post
    The flyers were mediocre, but they were intentionally not improved upon in FA or Trades ... we moved Schenn in his prime for a future 1st round pick. They were not incidentally anything. Fletcher has made about as many trades already as Hexy did. Hexy intentionally did nothing because the team was assessed as never going to be able to get there, and rebuild through the draft over 7 years.

    You can’t incidentally not sign anyone or trade for anyone to improve. That is all intent. Therefore, Tank.
    Fine... let's say I agree it was an ATTEMPT at tanking.



    Then admit it was a complete failure.
    "2008 WORLD ****ING CHAMPIONS"

  5. #2255
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,921
    we moved Schenn in his prime for a future 1st round pick.
    trading schenn was intentional, but the impact it had on the team was incidental.
    Hexy intentionally did nothing because the team was assessed as never going to be able to get there
    for some reason, i doubt that's the vision he sold to ed snider.
    You can’t incidentally not sign anyone or trade for anyone to improve. That is all intent. Therefore, Tank.
    tanking is an active process. keyword: active. keyword: process.

    tanking would have meant trading wayne simmonds and radko gudas for draft picks to make the team worse.
    tanking would have meant trading jake voracek picks and prospects to make the team worse.
    tanking would have meant playing alex lyon in goal rather than trading for petr mrazek because tanking is a race to the bottom; it is not a race for the 8-seed.


    hextall wasn't tanking; he was spicer cub.

  6. #2256
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    7,846
    Quote Originally Posted by txravis12 View Post
    Fine... let's say I agree it was an ATTEMPT at tanking.



    Then admit it was a complete failure.
    It wasn't a failure by any means ... I liked the draft picks approach, and I agreed that after pronger went down and our farm system was depleted, the approach was needed.

    I wish we saw it through

  7. #2257
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    7,846
    Quote Originally Posted by steagles View Post
    trading schenn was intentional, but the impact it had on the team was incidental.
    for some reason, i doubt that's the vision he sold to ed snider.
    tanking is an active process. keyword: active. keyword: process.

    tanking would have meant trading wayne simmonds and radko gudas for draft picks to make the team worse.
    tanking would have meant trading jake voracek picks and prospects to make the team worse.
    tanking would have meant playing alex lyon in goal rather than trading for petr mrazek because tanking is a race to the bottom; it is not a race for the 8-seed.


    hextall wasn't tanking; he was spicer cub.
    The horse was funny, but I don’t understand what you’re saying.

    We agreed the team was mediocre ... as such, they slide into the playoffs 2x, despite the coaching ... again, if you want to honor current contracts, come across as supportive, and believe in the painful development of younger players ... then you do exactly what Hextall did ... you have to ice a team, you already have players, let them play but don’t invest much. That literally happened, he didn’t help them. He probably should have traded G and Voracek ... but then we’d have been terrible and put a ton of pressure on a super young nucleus when our farm system didn’t have time to fully fill yet. I said for 5 years put kids in the NHL ... he didn’t. He believed in development of players and not rushing them ... so, he literally didn’t feel he needed to do much to tank but simply let the current team do things out there in a low expectation setting for Provorov, Couturier, Patrick, TK’s development ... Sanheim, Myers, etc. I felt he over did it with not advancing players, he didn’t feel the kids were ready. The current team meant nothing to him.

    Hexy couldn’t control contracts alread

    Adding the marginal goalie talent of Petr Mrazek, despite his anomaly last year, doesn’t count. How can you really look G in the face for a stretch run and know Homer would have opened up the wallet but Hexy was not ... and throw Lyon, who has a legit shot as a long term backup solution here, to the wolf’s and “ruin development” (that is the problem with over baking players is this convo)

  8. #2258
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    6,663
    Can we give the Hextall talk a rest and move forward? I'm pretty sure we all know where each of us stand on the issue at this point. With that out of the way:
    Should we all be concerned that both Provorov and Konecny's contract negotiations are being dragged out?

    Who could surprise and make the team out of camp?

    What might the lineups look like on opening night? Particularly if Provorov and or Konecny aren't signed by then?
    Breakout candidates?

  9. #2259
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    California
    Posts
    9,044
    Quote Originally Posted by CasperX22 View Post
    Can we give the Hextall talk a rest and move forward? I'm pretty sure we all know where each of us stand on the issue at this point. With that out of the way:
    Should we all be concerned that both Provorov and Konecny's contract negotiations are being dragged out?

    Who could surprise and make the team out of camp?

    What might the lineups look like on opening night? Particularly if Provorov and or Konecny aren't signed by then?
    Breakout candidates?
    i don't think so. Literally every rfa still hasn't been signed yet. Super annoying lol.

    I kind of want farabee to make it but think frost might be more ready. My breakouts are tk with 30 goals, patrick with 45 points, provorov back to 40 pts, ghost back to 60pts. I also will say that couts will get 85 while voracek will come back and get 80+ or have a career year in points. I honestly don't know why we write him off all the time. If he gets 10 more points via pp then he hits 76 last year so I can definitely see him back to 80+. I'll also say that we will be a top 5 team in defensive scoring this year. Can't imagine how we won't be if provorov gets 40, sanheim 40, myers 20+, ghost 50+, braun/niskanen 15+.

    I want to see these two lineups:

    G-Couts-TK
    Frost/Farabee-Hayes-Voracek
    JVR-Patrick-Lindblom

    or

    G-Couts-Voracek
    JVR-Hayes-Frost
    Lindblom-Patrick-TK

  10. #2260
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    California
    Posts
    9,044
    Im surrounding Patrick with more talent than I am with Hayes. Patrick and Voracek didn't really produce all that much together so just give him to hayes or the couts line. Would love to have lindblom-patrick-tk. Think that line can dominate and produce

  11. #2261
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,921
    He probably should have traded G and Voracek ... but then we’d have been terrible
    that right there is called tanking. all the other stuff: not tanking.
    He believed in development of players and not rushing them
    if he was better at it, he might still be our GM.

    because hextall was not willing to supplement our core with trades and free agent signing, the only way for his "process" to yield a contender was by turning laughton, cousins, lindblom, leier, NAK, etc. into middle-6 contributors. does that seem unreasonable? absolutely, which is why i have been so critical of him. it would have been nearly impossible to build a contender by that process, and there was no reason to try.


    fletcher proved that point this summer: he traded draft picks for veterans; he made free agent signings (big and small); and yet, like hextall, he was able to draft two high-quality prospects (york + brink), plus a handful of late round lottery tickets.

  12. #2262
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,921
    Would love to have lindblom-patrick-tk. Think that line can dominate and produce
    if i was an opposing coach, i'd salivate at the opportunity to get my top line on the ice against those 3. that line isn't fast enough, skilled enough or physical enough to be useful right now, imo.

    swap laughton for lindblom, and even though the line would be less talented, it would also be more physical, it'd be better at backchecking, better at forechecking and better at winning the puck back in their defensive zone. they'd also have a 2nd guy who can take face offs, in case patrick gets thrown out of the circle (that's a small concern, sure, but only until not having one bites you in the ***).

  13. #2263
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,921
    voracek will come back and get 80+ or have a career year in points. I honestly don't know why we write him off all the time.
    it's because he doesn't shoot the ****ing puck. it's kind of annoying when he's producing points, but it's aggravating as hell when he's going through a rough patch.


    personally, i think the best way to leverage our talent is to split JVR and voracek. both of them are good enough at what they do (voracek: playmaking; JVR: shooting) that they don't need to be on the same line to be effective. i'd be reasonably happy with any of these possibilities:

    giroux - couturier - voracek
    giroux - couturier - konecny
    giroux - couturier - frost
    JVR - hayes - konecny
    JVR - hayes - frost
    JVR - patrick - konecny
    JVR - patrick - frost
    lindblom - hayes - voracek
    konecny - hayes - voracek
    lindblom - patrick - voracek
    konecny - patrick - voracek
    farabee - hayes - voracek
    farabee - patrick - voracek
    laughton - hayes - voracek
    laughton - patrick - voracek

  14. #2264
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    California
    Posts
    9,044
    Quote Originally Posted by steagles View Post
    if i was an opposing coach, i'd salivate at the opportunity to get my top line on the ice against those 3. that line isn't fast enough, skilled enough or physical enough to be useful right now, imo.

    swap laughton for lindblom, and even though the line would be less talented, it would also be more physical, it'd be better at backchecking, better at forechecking and better at winning the puck back in their defensive zone. they'd also have a 2nd guy who can take face offs, in case patrick gets thrown out of the circle (that's a small concern, sure, but only until not having one bites you in the ***).
    i don't get why you think lindblom is not a solid 2 way guy? He is great in the cycle game, decent forechecker, and is really good on the boards. That line would probably be one of our fastest actually?! I want raffl with laughton as much as possible. Those two feed really well off each other and can create havoc on the forecheck. Have to keep them on the 4th line as much as possible unless injuries occur. Maybe a future line combo then.

    Its not like JVR-Patrick-Frost would be any better defensively and I don't think I want JVR-Hayes-Voracek. That line will be kinda slow and JVR/Voracek aren't the best 2 way guys we have. I would like to seperate them and have Voracek on the top line or with a speedier winger than JVR on the 2nd.

  15. #2265
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    California
    Posts
    9,044
    Quote Originally Posted by steagles View Post
    it's because he doesn't shoot the ****ing puck. it's kind of annoying when he's producing points, but it's aggravating as hell when he's going through a rough patch.


    personally, i think the best way to leverage our talent is to split JVR and voracek. both of them are good enough at what they do (voracek: playmaking; JVR: shooting) that they don't need to be on the same line to be effective. i'd be reasonably happy with any of these possibilities:

    giroux - couturier - voracek
    giroux - couturier - konecny
    giroux - couturier - frost
    JVR - hayes - konecny
    JVR - hayes - frost
    JVR - patrick - konecny
    JVR - patrick - frost
    lindblom - hayes - voracek
    konecny - hayes - voracek
    lindblom - patrick - voracek
    konecny - patrick - voracek
    farabee - hayes - voracek
    farabee - patrick - voracek
    laughton - hayes - voracek
    laughton - patrick - voracek
    he shoots a good amount, 200+, but he just isn't the greatest shooter. He does pass up a llot of prime shots (as does g/patrick). If only he had a better one timer....

    I agree with splitting G/Voracek.

    Predictions on the first ten games guys? That has always been our biggest downfall to start seasons.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •