I think Bourque could have put them over the top in 2000. They may not have blown the 3 games to 1 series lead against New Jersey and I also think they could have handled Dallas in the Finals. Avoid Game 7 against NJ and you avoid the Stevens hit on Lindros... instead, Lindros may have made his return in the finals against the Stars.

Of course, we'll never know.

But, yes, holding onto Gagne certainly helped the team for a number of years.
- bmeltzer

If they don't win the Cup in 2000 though, then everyone looks back in anger at losing Gagne for a guy who retired a year later.

It's not a steal for the Rangers. Rupp's a good guy to have on a team. He's been on Cup winners and he's tough. Palmieri's a tweener, bounces between the NHL & AHL at best.
- Jsaquella

it's not a big deal either way, but sather always finds ways to shed silly contracts.

i'm also really curious as to how darroll powe's agent got his client a three-year deal.

it's not a big deal either way, but sather always finds ways to shed silly contracts.

i'm also really curious as to how darroll powe's agent got his client a three-year deal.
- OrangeBlack27

Probably part of the reason the Flyers traded Powe when he was a RFA, wanted too much $$ or too many years

I'm not at all convinced it's an overpayment. He's been worth every $ this season thus far.
- Scoob

through age 39 season?

Probably part of the reason the Flyers traded Powe when he was a RFA, wanted too much $$ or too many years
- Jsaquella

really liked powe, but it's not like it's especially hard to find guys of his ilk for cheaper.

through age 39 season?
- OrangeBlack27

fabulous sentence

I absolutely do not think Holmgren is a failure. On the contrary, he is a very good GM.
- TheGreat28

He is a very good GM. Look at the team's record under his management:
Playoffs every year (5 times) since he took over fulltime (not counting his interim year replacing Clarke)
2nd round of the playoffs every year but one (4 times)
2 Eastern Conference Finals
1 Stanley Cup Finals

There are very few teams that can boast that kind of record the last 5 years. Besides a Stanley Cup, what more can you want?

through age 39 season?
- OrangeBlack27

Need a bigger sample size before assessing.

(But to play your game, what if they win a couple/few Cups during that span?)

Hopefully you are not lumping me into that group. I absolutely do not think Holmgren is a failure. On the contrary, he is a very good GM. I would much rather have him than Clarke.

But as Bill points out...the defense is really in trouble...not just this year but going forward after Kimmo retires or moves on. The cost of acquiring a defensemen has steadily gone up, and teams with the best ones are not letting them go. At some point the only way to get a decent 3-4 guy is to overpay, and that means losing some of that stable of young talented forwards. I think long-term they have to rethink the strategy of only drafting top-notch forwards, 3rd line energy guys and grinders (which can be easily and cheaply added through FA) and lower ranking d prospects.
- TheGreat28

No, I'm not lumping you in there. I've never read a statement from you that I can recall that comes close to labeling Holmgren a failure.
My thoughts are that things change in a hurry in the NHL. Look at the team from 10/11 to now. Look at the turnover. Patience is my message.
The Flyers drafting strategy isn't to draft top notch forwards, energy guys and grinders. Their stategy is to draft the best guy available.
No team is built entirely through the draft. Every team has holes that need to be filled through other means.

through age 39 season?
- OrangeBlack27

He's gonna be on the L T I R

Gonna stay on the L T I R.

He'll have a back injury
or maybe a knee
but one thing I can guarantee

He's gonna be on the L T I R

OK, let's look at it a different way. 2/3 of the top 15 were drafted or signed by their current team. So the point that most teams buy their defense isn't necessarily true either.
- TheGreat28

By my count again, and again going by the top 25... 13 of the 25 are on their second team (at least). Drafting is not an exact science. Drafting D-men is even harder to predict. Buying established d-men, via FA or trade, is a very very common way of establishing a blue line presence. Drafting is also another option.. just not as sure of a bet.

No, I'm not lumping you in there. I've never read a statement from you that I can recall that comes close to labeling Holmgren a failure.
My thoughts are that things change in a hurry in the NHL. Look at the team from 10/11 to now. Look at the turnover. Patience is my message.
The Flyers drafting strategy isn't to draft top notch forwards, energy guys and grinders. Their stategy is to draft the best guy available.
No team is built entirely through the draft. Every team has holes that need to be filled through other means.
- MJL

OK, thanks. Now....back to our regularly scheduled arguing...

Reminds me of a buddy of mine back in the day...he really believed in the "go ugly early" strategy. He figured if he played it that way he could find the best of the bunch. My thing...the best of uglies is still ugly.

They may be drafting the guys they think are the best available, but they sure seem to end up with a lot of guys that are energy guys and grinders. Maybe it's just because they're predisposed at looking that direction.

OK, thanks. Now....back to our regularly scheduled arguing...

Reminds me of a buddy of mine back in the day...he really believed in the "go ugly early" strategy. He figured if he played it that way he could find the best of the bunch. My thing...the best of uglies is still ugly.

They may be drafting the guys they think are the best available, but they sure seem to end up with a lot of guys that are energy guys and grinders. Maybe it's just because they're predisposed at looking that direction.
- TheGreat28

Sounds like Homer should stop drinking?

He is a very good GM. Look at the team's record under his management:
Playoffs every year (5 times) since he took over fulltime (not counting his interim year replacing Clarke)
2nd round of the playoffs every year but one (4 times)
2 Eastern Conference Finals
1 Stanley Cup Finals

There are very few teams that can boast that kind of record the last 5 years. Besides a Stanley Cup, what more can you want?
- psuhockey

Agreed. Obviously we all want a Cup, but personally I'm not like the typical Eagles fan (or WIP host) - all or nothing. Andy Reid is a good analogy for my position on Holmgren. I personally think Reid was a very good coach, probably the 2nd best coach in team history. But he believed rather strongly in certain things, and failure to adapt is likely what cost him a championship here.

To me, Holmgren is much more flexible. I do agree with the point that the Flyers are in fact too malleable, often changing from year to year based on who knocked them out of the playoffs. But that is Clarke and Snider I think, more so than Holmgren.

But I do worry that we will not have the D to match the maturing forwards in a few years, or that they will trade parts of the core to get them. And I worry that they'll always be a bridesmaid and never the proverbial bride. The only way to break that cycle, given the forward depth we have, is to draft more to need. It should've started last year in my opinion.

Sounds like Homer should stop drinking?
- 2731color

Nah, he's a hockey guy. That's blasphemy

Need a bigger sample size before assessing.

(But to play your game, what if they win a couple/few Cups during that span?)
- Scoob

no need to fill the thread with this tired convo. i'll just flood your inbox.

He's gonna be on the L T I R

Gonna stay on the L T I R.

He'll have a back injury
or maybe a knee
but one thing I can guarantee

He's gonna be on the L T I R
- Jsaquella

pretty much. quite a business model.

By my count again, and again going by the top 25... 13 of the 25 are on their second team (at least). Drafting is not an exact science. Drafting D-men is even harder to predict. Buying established d-men, via FA or trade, is a very very common way of establishing a blue line presence. Drafting is also another option.. just not as sure of a bet.
- jak521

Yes, it is just more expensive. JVR for Schenn is a great example. I am not against that trade by the way. But...in another year or two JVR will be a 1st line potentially all-star power forward, and Schenn will be a solid stay-at-home 2nd pairing dman.

We gave up a higher ceiling player to fill a position of higher value, lower supply. That's fine for one trade...but not sustainable when you need to fill the majority of your blueline.

(and...imagine the cost of a 1-2 guy, a la Weber or Yandle now)

pretty much. quite a business model.
- OrangeBlack27

The time added at the end was simply to reduce the cap hit. Under the last CBA that wouldn't have been an issue, since the deal was in effect before his 35th birthday.

It's possible that Bryz will be bought out, as well.

The time added at the end was simply to reduce the cap hit. Under the last CBA that wouldn't have been an issue, since the deal was in effect before his 35th birthday.

It's possible that Bryz will be bought out, as well.
- Jsaquella

it's nice that they have two summers to exercise that option, though.

it's nice that they have two summers to exercise that option, though.
- OrangeBlack27

Yep.

Yes, it is just more expensive. JVR for Schenn is a great example. I am not against that trade by the way. But...in another year or two JVR will be a 1st line potentially all-star power forward, and Schenn will be a solid stay-at-home 2nd pairing dman.

We gave up a higher ceiling player to fill a position of higher value, lower supply. That's fine for one trade...but not sustainable when you need to fill the majority of your blueline.

(and...imagine the cost of a 1-2 guy, a la Weber or Yandle now)
- TheGreat28

I think the biggest problem with drafting defense is that it is based off of the pretty distant future. Its very rare to see a D-man come straight out of the draft and make an impact on an NHL roster.. usually itll take 4-6 years. There are players that are exceptions however. Any who...

For example: Flyers 2011 Draft

They enter the draft with their defense looking like a strong point. They had just traded away Jeff Carter, Mike Richards, Kris Versteeg, Dan Carcillo, Ville Leino walked... On Defense they have Pronger, Timonen, Carle, Meszy, Coburn.

Immediate need? Forward. So they picked possibly the best two way forward in the past few drafts... maybe since Towes.

Now, fast forward to this year. They are without Pronger and Meszy due to injuries, Carle left to go to TB. In a year and a half... all of that has happened. Now, honestly... in 6 months we could have a totally different team/ defense again.

Again, hopefully you're not referring to me - I never ever imply nor think that if you don't share my viewpoint that you are wrong. Two sides of a discussion are merely two different opinions...and in most cases the truth is in the middle anyway. And I'm also not as extreme about this defense argument as others.

But to your point about need and supply, this last draft there was ample supply of highly regarded d prospects. They obviously felt stronger about Laughton and Stolarz vs. Maata and Thrower for example. Jsaq's right...debating it isn't going to change it. But I am hoping that they change their strategy going forward.
- TheGreat28

I wan't referring to you, no. And to clarify, I'd like to see them stock more defensive talent in the pipeline. I think simply having more/better blueliners would be a start to improving the organization's ability to develop the position.

But I think it's a significantly different consideration from how to fix the NHL blueline in the immediate future.

it's nice that they have two summers to exercise that option, though.
- OrangeBlack27

I definitely like the flexibility this gives them.

Mike Rupp fetched them Powe and Palmieri? Seems like a lot.
- NickTheKid87

I have no idea how Sather pulled that off? Palmieri a throw in? I hope Rupp rots in Minny.. he deserves it after dissing Jagr with the salute in the WC..