This all could be true, but the Flyers seem to overpay in a lot of the signings.

Look at Max Talbot.
Last year the deal looked sweet.
But 1.75M is a ton for a fourth line grinder, which in reality is what he is.
If he was another Lappy, maybe.
But another (maybe slight) overpayment.
- Marc D

i wanted Vern fiddler but max was stellar last yr

Like we've said over and over, how is it that we see it here, on HockeyBuzz, and the national media sees it and scouts see it but the team itself either doesn't see it or refuses to change. It blows my mind.
- NickTheKid87

I would love to be a fly on the wall in Holmgren's office right now.

I can't imagine what's going through his head

One thing I really hope he's not considering is tearing down the young core of under 25 forwards. I think there is promise there, but it needs to be brought about the right way.

I think you have a point, there has been a need to look for a replacement for Kimmo for the future for a while.

I would guess that Homer tried to get a defenseman in the Carter and or Richards deal.
I think he had no luck getting a player he wanted back and took the best deal he could.

Also I think he probably tried to maximize the JVR trade and likely did the best he could.
No team is moving young top two way defenseman in trades

Look at what the Gologoski deal cost... James Neal.
- Marc D

IMO, it's more about putting together a solid group of dmen rather than getting a real #1. Don't get me wrong, to have a guy like Shattenkirk or Yandle or whoever would be nice, but I think they could win with 6 2nd pairing defenseman just as much as they could win with a #1, 2 second pairing guys, two 4th/5th dman and a 6th.

Like we've said over and over, how is it that we see it here, on HockeyBuzz, and the national media sees it and scouts see it but the team itself either doesn't see it or refuses to change. It blows my mind.
- NickTheKid87

It's maybe possible that it's not the big problem, despite all signs pointing to it being the problem.

I've come up with my own hypothesis... I honestly think the Flyers, due to their age and overall lack of team maturity, has developed a SERIOUSLY severe case of "diffusion of responsibility." The general term is actually used in social and group psychology, and COULD be the real issue with this team.

Essentially, the players look around the room and see each other. Obviously, on paper, there are some big and good names on this team. What if everyone in the room, especially the younger guys, are thinking the "next guy" is going to turn it around or have a great game. Or, that the PK guys will save us, or that the PP guys will save us, whereby the entire group as a whole is looking to a sub-section of the team (roles and situations) for them to get the job done or turn things around? Does anyone know what I mean or am getting at?

That basically the team is too young and inexperienced (which I don't like to believe) and that there is too much diffusion of responsibility and actions, and that the overall product on the ice is what we're seeing.

I would love to be a fly on the wall in Holmgren's office right now.

I can't imagine what's going through his head

One thing I really hope he's not considering is tearing down the young core of under 25 forwards. I think there is promise there, but it needs to be brought about the right way.
- johndewar

I think it's better that they suck right now and not that they are still in contention (realistically speaking). If they were still marginal, I could see a panic trade being all the more likely. No point in that now.

I think it's better that they suck right now and not that they are still in contention (realistically speaking). If they were still marginal, I could see a panic trade being all the more likely. No point in that now.
- NickTheKid87

Agreed.

There is nobody else available that will bring what he does for any less. In fact, to "replace" him you have to pay more for someone that would do less.

Look at Matt Carle's situation....everyone thought we could have/should have signed him for less when we had the chance. But the Flyers waited because they were trying for the home run offer sheet or FA signing. That didn't work out, and once the market price was established, we got out-bid for Carle.

So now we want to repeat that same scenario with Kimmo? Wait it out and see if we can get him for less, or get someone better for similar money? I see this as the team learning their lesson from the Carle situation, and locking up a valuable commodity before some other idiot GM offers Hainsey or Visnovsky $6M+ a season and we have to pay even more for Kimmo or lose him entirely.

You can't have it both ways people...

- BringBack25

your right. but that would make him somewhat valuable trade commodity no?

It's maybe possible that it's not the big problem, despite all signs pointing to it being the problem.

I've come up with my own hypothesis... I honestly think the Flyers, due to their age and overall lack of team maturity, has developed a SERIOUSLY severe case of "diffusion of responsibility." The general term is actually used in social and group psychology, and COULD be the real issue with this team.

Essentially, the players look around the room and see each other. Obviously, on paper, there are some big and good names on this team. What if everyone in the room, especially the younger guys, are thinking the "next guy" is going to turn it around or have a great game. Or, that the PK guys will save us, or that the PP guys will save us, whereby the entire group as a whole is looking to a sub-section of the team (roles and situations) for them to get the job done or turn things around? Does anyone know what I mean or am getting at?

That basically the team is too young and inexperienced (which I don't like to believe) and that there is too much diffusion of responsibility and actions, and that the overall product on the ice is what we're seeing.
- Flyers_V88

I'm not saying that the coaching is the only issue. In fact, I think diffusion of responsibility plays a role as well, especially considering how young the team is.

There are a lot of holes in the team and big players haven't stepped up for whatever reason but I think it's pretty clear that the system doesn't work with this group regardless of anything else. That problem should be identified by the team and corrected. The psychological factors are less obvious and harder to change.

and Eric Johnson...and shattenkirk might end up the better plyr

homer has to find a way to get it done or draft hamilton instead of couts. and that's not a knock on couts.
- isaiah520

yeh I think a real good argument about taking Hamilton with the pick given organizational needs could be made.

I think Couts will be a stud for years and so will Doogie.

Right now he may need to package one of the young tradable forwards with one of their defenseman (Coburn/Grossmann/Mez) to get a young puck moving defenseman back.

It will likely seem a big over payment, but their balance on the back end is wrong with Kimmo nearing the end of his career.

Absolutely, add Weber to this roster and EVERYTHING changes. First off, JVR is most likely traded for a 1st rather than a player, cause of Weber's cap hit. Your top pair is most likely Weber/Timonen, with Coburn/Grossman a solid #2. Even when Mez was injured, you still could have spotted your 5 and 6 guys cause Weber can eat up huge minutes. With Mez healthy, your number 6 would probably only need to play 6-8 minutes a night. Finally, even the 2nd team pp unit would improve, as Weber would anchor the 1st unit and allow Kimmo to move down to the 2nd.

Oh well!
- BiggE

Not everything changes. They traded JvR before the offer sheet to Weber.

practically everyone. was told we needed to wait to see how the new plyrs looked...no rush, we have time, etc. hence, the point about using the pronger injury excuse is weak because homer was remaking his team, had a wealth of assets, a window of opp and didn't do what he needed to do. i put that on the GM and where this team is at is part of a devolution that takes root in personnel decisions.

yes, lavi has earned the lions share this yr, but that's after an erosion of the talent base/ mix. now they will have to overpay for a d man w/ neg leverage.
- isaiah520

Sorry, but I don't see that. It is he overwhelming opinion of the board, that the Flyers need a top two way puck moving defenseman. So this idea that practically everyone is telling you that you're wrong on that thought, is self-invented.
And I'll repeat what I've said many time before. In order to get that player as part of the return in a trade, such as when they traded Carter and Richards. That player has tobe available to them. So which defenseman that has been traded, should the Flyers have gotten, in return for either Carter or Richards?

Would you have been happy with Jack Johnson instead of Simmonds or Schenn?

IMO, it's more about putting together a solid group of dmen rather than getting a real #1. Don't get me wrong, to have a guy like Shattenkirk or Yandle or whoever would be nice, but I think they could win with 6 2nd pairing defenseman just as much as they could win with a #1, 2 second pairing guys, two 4th/5th dman and a 6th.
- NickTheKid87

They need at least one guy that is a viable threat to score and set up scoring from the point, and that can start the rush effectively.

Kimmo was that guy.

I don't think they have a replacement for him.
Mez is a big maybe.

It's maybe possible that it's not the big problem, despite all signs pointing to it being the problem.

I've come up with my own hypothesis... I honestly think the Flyers, due to their age and overall lack of team maturity, has developed a SERIOUSLY severe case of "diffusion of responsibility." The general term is actually used in social and group psychology, and COULD be the real issue with this team.

Essentially, the players look around the room and see each other. Obviously, on paper, there are some big and good names on this team. What if everyone in the room, especially the younger guys, are thinking the "next guy" is going to turn it around or have a great game. Or, that the PK guys will save us, or that the PP guys will save us, whereby the entire group as a whole is looking to a sub-section of the team (roles and situations) for them to get the job done or turn things around? Does anyone know what I mean or am getting at?

That basically the team is too young and inexperienced (which I don't like to believe) and that there is too much diffusion of responsibility and actions, and that the overall product on the ice is what we're seeing.
- Flyers_V88

could be some truth here

I'm not saying that the coaching is the only issue. In fact, I think diffusion of responsibility plays a role as well, especially considering how young the team is.

There are a lot of holes in the team and big players haven't stepped up for whatever reason but I think it's pretty clear that the system doesn't work with this group regardless of anything else. That problem should be identified by the team and corrected. The psychological factors are less obvious and harder to change.
- NickTheKid87

But I personally think that's maybe at the root of "why" the system doesn't work, or isn't working to how we've seen it in the past. That maybe as a result of having the thinner roster, the players realize this and expect the names like G, Harts, Voracek, etc, to step up every game, when in fact it takes everyone pulling the load. Like I said, this is just a personal hypothesis as to what's gone so wrong this year. I cannot stand to think of watching playoff hockey and having no Flyers

Having and addressing a weakness is different than changing philosophies every few years. In the late 1990's and early 2000's they tried to out-Devil New Jersey. Then, after the lockout, they tried to be the Sabres. Now after losing to Boston and New Jersey, they seems to want to be more like those teams.

There's no patience. It seems like they're going in 8 different directions at once.
- Jsaquella

You think in the last couple years they're trying to be Boston and New Jersey because they are nothing like those two teams.

When New Jersey was winning in the 90s they didn't become a lockdown counter strike team like the Devils and the Sabres were small up front with mobile defensemen. The Flyers never came close to being like that. In fact they did the opposite, getting bigger up front and adding Hatcher and Rathje.

yeh I think a real good argument about taking Hamilton with the pick given organizational needs could be made.

I think Couts will be a stud for years and so will Doogie.

Right now he may need to package one of the young tradable forwards with one of their defenseman (Coburn/Grossmann/Mez) to get a young puck moving defenseman back.

It will likely seem a big over payment, but their balance on the back end is wrong with Kimmo nearing the end of his career.
- Marc D

really wanted to avoid this situation, but here w/ are....neg leverage

They need at least one guy that is a viable threat to score and set up scoring from the point, and that can start the rush effectively.

Kimmo was that guy.

I don't think they have a replacement for him.
Mez is a big maybe.
- Marc D

What I'm saying is that they need a guy that can move the puck like Kimmo in his prime but they don't need him to be as responsible defensively (i.e. he'd be cheaper) if they have other guys that would make up for that up and down the lineup, including forwards.

Burp. DP

It's maybe possible that it's not the big problem, despite all signs pointing to it being the problem.

I've come up with my own hypothesis... I honestly think the Flyers, due to their age and overall lack of team maturity, has developed a SERIOUSLY severe case of "diffusion of responsibility." The general term is actually used in social and group psychology, and COULD be the real issue with this team.

Essentially, the players look around the room and see each other. Obviously, on paper, there are some big and good names on this team. What if everyone in the room, especially the younger guys, are thinking the "next guy" is going to turn it around or have a great game. Or, that the PK guys will save us, or that the PP guys will save us, whereby the entire group as a whole is looking to a sub-section of the team (roles and situations) for them to get the job done or turn things around? Does anyone know what I mean or am getting at?

That basically the team is too young and inexperienced (which I don't like to believe) and that there is too much diffusion of responsibility and actions, and that the overall product on the ice is what we're seeing.
- Flyers_V88

If this is true then the players need to be held accountable. So yeah you start healthy scratching those players. You can't get them all right now, and you'll lose some games ( wipes tears from eyes), but it would clean that up real quick if our "stars" began getting benched...

You think in the last couple years they're trying to be Boston and New Jersey because they are nothing like those two teams.

When New Jersey was winning in the 90s they didn't become a lockdown counter strike team like the Devils and the Sabres were small up front with mobile defensemen. The Flyers never came close to being like that. In fact they did the opposite, getting bigger up front and adding Hatcher and Rathje.
- mayorofangrytown

They signed Rathje and Hatcher before getting beat by Buffalo. that's when the stated organization message was to become Buffalo.

Snider makes edicts and then the GM has to react and make changes is my point.

But I personally think that's maybe at the root of "why" the system doesn't work, or isn't working to how we've seen it in the past. That maybe as a result of having the thinner roster, the players realize this and expect the names like G, Harts, Voracek, etc, to step up every game, when in fact it takes everyone pulling the load. Like I said, this is just a personal hypothesis as to what's gone so wrong this year. I cannot stand to think of watching playoff hockey and having no Flyers
- Flyers_V88

They don't have the guys on the blueline to run this system. The psychological factors make the problem worse but the problem still remains.

They signed Rathje and Hatcher before getting beat by Buffalo. that's when the stated organization message was to become Buffalo.

Snider makes edicts and then the GM has to react and make changes is my point.
- Jsaquella

And how did they go about becoming Buffalo other than realizing Buffalo was drafting and developing players better than them and poaching some of their staff?

really wanted to avoid this situation, but here w/ are....neg leverage
- isaiah520

yeh the reality of getting a gifted offensive defenseman in a trade sucks.

Couts and a high first round pick gets you Yandle, maybe

yuk, no thanks

Sorry, but I don't see that. It is he overwhelming opinion of the board, that the Flyers need a top two way puck moving defenseman. So this idea that practically everyone is telling you that you're wrong on that thought, is self-invented.
And I'll repeat what I've said many time before. In order to get that player as part of the return in a trade, such as when they traded Carter and Richards. That player has tobe available to them. So which defenseman that has been traded, should the Flyers have gotten, in return for either Carter or Richards?

Would you have been happy with Jack Johnson instead of Simmonds or Schenn?
- MJL

it's the opinion of the board now, of course. back in the summer of '11, not so much.

as far as who was available...he didn't get the guy, did he? in the end the result is what matters. the best opp he had was hamilton. that we know. doesn't mean couts is a bad pick by any stretch, but need can justifiable mitigate a draft board when plyrs are that close. Johnson's a close call, I'd have to think about.

They signed Rathje and Hatcher before getting beat by Buffalo. that's when the stated organization message was to become Buffalo.

Snider makes edicts and then the GM has to react and make changes is my point.
- Jsaquella

The only big edicts I remember was when they brought in Hitch and Bryzgalof. Holmgren didn't even get the goalie he wanted. and found that whole thing a mistake from the beginning. There was a better choice to be made at the time.

I also am of the opinion that Laviolette turned the goalie situation into a circus in those playoffs. I know for a fact that while we may not have agreed on how we would resolve it I know we both agreed on that at least.