When a team signs a player quickly out of Free Agency. It's because they know what they want, and are comfortable with the player. I'll trust the Flyers management, Pro Scouts and talent evaluators in that decision. Instead of calling it a bad decision right out of the gate without even seeing the player play. But it's easy to be a GM with hindsight.
- MJL

Leighton has always said he plays his best when he gets in a lot of games, idk why that would be a viable back-up spot play option. If anything, don't you have Leighton get the bulk of the starts in the AHL and prepped in case of injury and have Bouch be back up who is a great locker room guy, is better at opening the door, and is better in spot play?

Leighton has always said he plays his best when he gets in a lot of games, idk why that would be a viable back-up spot play option. If anything, don't you have Leighton get the bulk of the starts in the AHL and prepped in case of injury and have Bouch who is a great locker room guy, is better at opening the door, and is better in spot play?
- GirouxForTheShow

One statement made by a player has morphed into making it a fact that Leighton isn't suited to be a backup. I personally prefer Boucher. Because I think he's a better player, and has had a longer NHL career. But I don't think there is a big difference between the two at this point. And I look at a player objectively and avoid making a determination on whether a player is a good player or not, or a move is a good or bad move in most cases, before seeing them actually play. If they feel that Boucher is the better player right now. Based on whatever. Then absolutely make the move. But none of that means that Leighton isn't capable of being a good NHL backup. It's funny, a lot of players came into this Season out of the lockout and showed rust in their play. Players that are liked, got a pass. Players that aren't liked, well they just suck.

When a team signs a player quickly out of Free Agency. It's because they know what they want, and are comfortable with the player. I'll trust the Flyers management, Pro Scouts and talent evaluators in that decision. Instead of calling it a bad decision right out of the gate without even seeing the player play. But it's easy to be a GM with hindsight.
- MJL

let's examine that. i understand that the final verdict on leighton is not in yet. but in general, when i criticize a move out of the gate and it turns out i was right, then i'm being overly negative. how convenient...

do you think leighton has an upper body injury that really prevents him from playing or does he look so bad that they are milking a minor tweak because they must acheive certain objectives during the upcoming road trip? were you impressed with leightons last performance? are you impressed with leighton on the balance of his entire nhl career excepting a 6 week period in 2010?

were you "right out of the gate" critical of trading a #1 for eminger? if you were following the game for any reasonable length of time, i would expect that you were. if that's the case, you're a hypocrite. this is not to rehash a referendum on homer's tenure, but only to illustrate how condescending you're being. it's a hockey rumor site and fan forum. we're here to air our opinion's, so come down from your (frank)ing mountain and have some fun.

One statement made by a player has morphed into making it a fact that Leighton isn't suited to be a backup. I personally prefer Boucher. Because I think he's a better player, and has had a longer NHL career. But I don't think there is a big difference between the two at this point. And I look at a player objectively and avoid making a determination on whether a player is a good player or not, or a move is a good or bad move in most cases, before seeing them actually play. If they feel that Boucher is the better player right now. Based on whatever. Then absolutely make the move. But none of that means that Leighton isn't capable of being a good NHL backup. It's funny, a lot of players came into this Season out of the lockout and showed rust in their play. Players that are liked, got a pass. Players that aren't liked, well they just suck.
- MJL

That one statement was made by Leighton himself, so as long as he wasn't lying to the camera, I would take his admitted characteristics as close to FACT as you can get. If he admittedly plays better/feels better when he is playing in consecutive, several games, why not have him handle the bulk of the starts in the AHL? Just makes sense, regardless if I like/dislike Leighton, I think they are pretty lateral movements in terms of who has more talent.

UBI = vertigo?

UBI = vertigo?


- Scoob

Always great to hear a Jeff Hackett reference..

let's examine that. i understand that the final verdict on leighton is not in yet. but in general, when i criticize a move out of the gate and it turns out i was right, then i'm being overly negative. how convenient...

do you think leighton has an upper body injury that really prevents him from playing or does he look so bad that they are milking a minor tweak because they must acheive certain objectives during the upcoming road trip? were you impressed with leightons last performance? are you impressed with leighton on the balance of his entire nhl career excepting a 6 week period in 2010?

were you "right out of the gate" critical of trading a #1 for eminger? if you were following the game for any reasonable length of time, i would expect that you were. if that's the case, you're a hypocrite. this is not to rehash a referendum on homer's tenure, but only to illustrate how condescending you're being. it's a hockey rumor site and fan forum. we're here to air our opinion's, so come down from your (frank)ing mountain and have some fun.
- isaiah520

If you go back and read yesterday's thread I predicted that Boucher would be called up for this road trip, and low and behold he's on the charter to Toronto. Of course when I suggested this someone was quick to jump all over it.

The fact they have to invent a phantom injury to get Leighton off the roster tells me everything I need to know about the situation.

That one statement was made by Leighton himself, so as long as he wasn't lying to the camera, I would take his admitted characteristics as close to FACT as you can get. If he admittedly plays better/feels better when he is playing in consecutive, several games, why not have him handle the bulk of the starts in the AHL? Just makes sense, regardless if I like/dislike Leighton, I think they are pretty lateral movements in terms of who has more talent.
- GirouxForTheShow

The difference is that all Leighton was saying is that he feels he plays better when he get's more playing time. I think that's true with every player. What he isn't saying is that since I play better with more playing time. I'm not suited to be an NHL backup. But that's what that has been turned into. I would agree that in terms of talent it's a pretty lateral move. It all depends on who they feel is playing better right now, or there truly is an injury issue. I think it's latter. Because with there no longer being recall Waivers. All they have to do is Waive Leghton, which he'll most likely clear. And Recall Boucher. If they've made the decision that Boucher is going to be the backup. Makes no sense to feign an injury and keep both on the Cap.

If you go back and read yesterday's thread I predicted that Boucher would be called up for this road trip, and low and behold he's on the charter to Toronto. Of course when I suggested this someone was quick to jump all over it.

The fact they have to invent a phantom injury to get Leighton off the roster tells me everything I need to know about the situation.
- PLindbergh31

I have nothing against Leighton, but I think it does make sense that he may be a better backup for us because he seems to be better coming in after limited action.

Maybe he got hurt slinging a hockey bag over his shoulder, which was filled to the brim with quarters; his contractually specified method of collecting the combined $3 million he's made from the Flyers in the the last three seasons. Leights carried the ever-expanding bag around for three years, 'cause he thinks banks are unlucky.

Goalies are a strange lot, you know .
- bmeltzer

You may have just nailed it.

"Leighton could miss up to 10 days."

Same duration as the road trip.
- bmeltzer

And when they return it will end up being changed to "out for season"

let's examine that. i understand that the final verdict on leighton is not in yet. but in general, when i criticize a move out of the gate and it turns out i was right, then i'm being overly negative. how convenient...

do you think leighton has an upper body injury that really prevents him from playing or does he look so bad that they are milking a minor tweak because they must acheive certain objectives during the upcoming road trip? were you impressed with leightons last performance? are you impressed with leighton on the balance of his entire nhl career excepting a 6 week period in 2010?

were you "right out of the gate" critical of trading a #1 for eminger? if you were following the game for any reasonable length of time, i would expect that you were. if that's the case, you're a hypocrite. this is not to rehash a referendum on homer's tenure, but only to illustrate how condescending you're being. it's a hockey rumor site and fan forum. we're here to air our opinion's, so come down from your (frank)ing mountain and have some fun.
- isaiah520

Criticize enough moves out of the gate, eventually you'll be occasionally right. Because every move doesn't work out. I think Leighton does have an injury.
Whether I'm impressed with Leighton for the balance of his NHL career is irrelevant. All that matters is how he plays from this point forward. And I will judge him on how he plays, not before.

It is extremely rare for me to label a deal a bad move before I actually get some feedback from the player actually playing, before making a judgement on a player or a player move made by the team.

Eminger is one such move in which I did criticize the move.

If you go back and read yesterday's thread I predicted that Boucher would be called up for this road trip, and low and behold he's on the charter to Toronto. Of course when I suggested this someone was quick to jump all over it.

The fact they have to invent a phantom injury to get Leighton off the roster tells me everything I need to know about the situation.
- PLindbergh31

So if the Flyers are choosing Boucher over Leighton to be the backup. Why not just Waive Leighton, send him down the AHL. And recall Boucher? Why carry both players on the Cap?

So if the Flyers are choosing Boucher over Leighton to be the backup. Why not just Waive Leighton, send him down the AHL. And recall Boucher? Why carry both players on the Cap?
- MJL

If Leighton is hurt why was he suited up yesterday? If Bryzgalov got injured in yesterday's game the Flyers were going to put in an injured goaltender?

If you believe Leighton is injured you must believe in the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy.

If you go back and read yesterday's thread I predicted that Boucher would be called up for this road trip, and low and behold he's on the charter to Toronto. Of course when I suggested this someone was quick to jump all over it.

The fact they have to invent a phantom injury to get Leighton off the roster tells me everything I need to know about the situation.
- PLindbergh31

they can't just throw away points on this trip. a really bad road trip could sink them and bryz was a little sloppy yesterday...maybe showing some fatigue.

Maybe he got hurt slinging a hockey bag over his shoulder, which was filled to the brim with quarters; his contractually specified method of collecting the combined $3 million he's made from the Flyers in the the last three seasons. Leights carried the ever-expanding bag around for three years, 'cause he thinks banks are unlucky.

Goalies are a strange lot, you know .
- bmeltzer

LOL Bill the comedian strikes again...

do you remember any of this hidden injury stuff?
- Don'tForgetTocchet

Yeah. Word came out right after he signed, IIRC.

The difference is that all Leighton was saying is that he feels he plays better when he get's more playing time. I think that's true with every player. What he isn't saying is that since I play better with more playing time. I'm not suited to be an NHL backup. But that's what that has been turned into. I would agree that in terms of talent it's a pretty lateral move. It all depends on who they feel is playing better right now, or there truly is an injury issue. I think it's latter. Because with there no longer being recall Waivers. All they have to do is Waive Leghton, which he'll most likely clear. And Recall Boucher. If they've made the decision that Boucher is going to be the backup. Makes no sense to feign an injury and keep both on the Cap.
- MJL

No poop he isn't saying that LOL

He's a professional athlete, he isn't coming out and saying I don't prefer the position I am playing and I'd rather the starter position. But there's got to be some type of mental process where you think... The proportion of leightons ability as a back up compared to his ability as a starter is much more vast than Boochs. If a player admittedly plays better with more starts, wouldn't you want to increase the productivity of your assets? Likewise, you have a potential backup in the AHL currently who has a history of being a capable back up and seems to be pretty even keel when it comes to spot play and starting play.

If Leighton is hurt why was he suited up yesterday? If Bryzgalov got injured in yesterday's game the Flyers were going to put in an injured goaltender?

If you believe Leighton is injured you must believe in the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy.
- PLindbergh31

When did they know about the injury. When could another backup arrive in time for an afternoon game. There is logisitics involved. So if Leighton isn't hurt, why not Waive him and send him down? Why carry 3 goalies on the Cap?

they can't just throw away points on this trip. a really bad road trip could sink them and bryz was a little sloppy yesterday...maybe showing some fatigue.
- isaiah520

Exactly. Leighton won't play another game this year.

Criticize enough moves out of the gate, eventually you'll be occasionally right. Because every move doesn't work out. I think Leighton does have an injury.
Whether I'm impressed with Leighton for the balance of his NHL career is irrelevant. All that matters is how he plays from this point forward. And I will judge him on how he plays, not before.

It is extremely rare for me to label a deal a bad move before I actually get some feedback from the player actually playing, before making a judgement on a player or a player move made by the team.

Eminger is one such move in which I did criticize the move.
- MJL

I'm glad you've mastered the art of going all tabula rasa after the announcement of any flyer personnel moves. the idea that a players past performance could color your judgement is so Santayana-ish.

·_·

No poop he isn't saying that LOL

He's a professional athlete, he isn't coming out and saying I don't prefer the position I am playing and I'd rather the starter position. But there's got to be some type of mental process where you think... The proportion of leightons ability as a back up compared to his ability as a starter is much more vast than Boochs. If a player admittedly plays better with more starts, wouldn't you want to increase the productivity of your assets? Likewise, you have a potential backup in the AHL currently who has a history of being a capable back up and seems to be pretty even keel when it comes to spot play and starting play.
- GirouxForTheShow

Who is a better player or a better backup, Leighton vs. Boucher, is a different argument. Then whether or not Leighton is suited to be a backup in the NHL. Which like I said, that one single statement has morphed into Leighton isn't a capable backup. Every player, plays better with more playing time. Including Boucher.

Exactly. Leighton won't play another game this year.
- PLindbergh31

I don't know about that because boosh could be a spent force, but it wouldn't shock me. I think the brass want to re-evaluate the b/u position though.

I'm glad you've mastered the art of going all tabula rasa after the announcement of any flyer personnel moves. the idea that a players past performance could color your judgement is so Santayana-ish.
- isaiah520

Luke Schenn's playing time was reduced last Season, and by all accounts he struggled for a lot of time last year. So based on that, I should have used that information to label the player? Or should I use the 12 games that I've seen him play as a Flyer this year? Your call!