I'm not sure if him going for it or not fits into the equation. If the coach tells you that you are scratched, you are scratched. I'm just not sure if Berube would do that to a player as respected as Timonen, but at 38 years old, a few nights off during the season really wouldn't be a bad idea.
- BiggE

Let's see Berube scratch Rosehill first, then we can worry about Timonen.

well, Coburn is not a slow player
- Marc D

HeStinksTradeHimNow

Also, as a general note, I'm sick and (frank)ing tired of people poopting on Coburn and Grossmann. These guys are paid UNDER what they'd get if they hit the open market. People female dog and moan about them all day because they expect them to be perfect shutdown defenders who are mobile, have 100 MPH slapshots, and are without fault. To those people, screw your (frank)ing heads on.

Every member of the defense (save Schenn and Timonen) had an absolutely abysmal year last year. That includes Gustafsson up until the very end. But if you look at the defenses around the league, Coburn and Grossmann are on par or better than what most of the NHL can offer in their 4-6 D spots. I'm sorry Coburn had a horrible season where the entire team sucked and that he hasn't produced at the same clip he did in 07/08. I'm sorry Grossmann is about an unsexy as a player can be, only being one of the better bottom-3 defensive defensemen in the league.

You heard the saying "The Grass Isn't Always Greener?" That's what you'd get if you just "dumped" one of these players. They'd go off to a team that actually plays with a good team defense, and although they'd be the same players and play to the same level, you'd all be moaning about how good they are, and why they never played like that here. In short, you can all go (frank) yourselves and actually learn why this highly competent defense can't seemingly function.
- jmatchett383

This should start some conversation. With back to back games tonight and tomorrow, would it maybe be a good idea to sit Timonen for one of those games and get Gus into the lineup? Kimmo's a warrior and he won't like it, but it may be best for both him and the team for him NOT to play on back to back nights.
- BiggE

I would like to see Gus in there at some point.
Not playing Kimmo on back to backs is probably one way to do it.

I would like to see Gus in there at some point.
Not playing Kimmo on back to backs is probably one way to do it.
- Marc D

There's more than one way to skin a red.
Aw crap, I'm gonna have a lawsuit brought against me.

Defensive guys who can't move, are constantly hemmed in their own zone, and can't clear the puck out are liabilities.

I also understand that there's a large faction of fans who are willing to overlook these things, though, because these players are trying really hard.
- bradleyc4

They're not liabilities if they play on a team that plays a solid team game, and solid team defense. Most good teams have players like Grossmann on their team. And they're certainly not liabilities. When used properly in the correct situations, they are highly effective. And very important to the mix of the team.

well, Coburn is not a slow player
- Marc D

I wasn't referring to him specifically; just any player. You can get to the point where you have enough players with enough limitations that you have a bad team -- and no amount of coaching, "hard work" or "compete level" is going to change that.

A team of Mario Lemieuxs is going to score more than a team of Jay Rosehills. If a person can acknowledge that, then that same person can acknowledge that at some point, there is a "tipping point" where having that extra Mario Lemieux makes a difference and subtracting one more Jay Rosehill makes a difference.

I don't think anybody on this team is going to look good defensively until they get on the same chapter, not to even mention the same page.
- Tomahawk

With this team lacking pure goal scoring finishers besides 40 and 28 one can only wonder why Holmgren did not resign Gagne. I know he is old but the end of last year he was arguably their best forward. The lines would have more balance and would be more productive in my opinion.
Hartnell Giroux Voracek
Gagne LeCavalier Simmonds
Schenn Couturier Read
Talbot Hall Rinaldo

The first line can be a repeat of last years success
The second line has speed and size
The third line has the kids on it
And the fourth line has grit

Does it make too much sense or is it just me?
Has Gagne really lost that much from the end of last season?
Right now their left wing depth is not good
- flyeredup77

The Flyers have one of the deeper corps of offensive players in the entire League. Playing the way they've been playing, adding Gagne wouldn't do squat for their offensive output.

Seriously?

This is just simple overvaluing of players. One coaching change and one system change doesn't negate entirely whatever limitations a player has.

Starting at the same point, a slow player is going to lose a puck race to Pavel Bure, no matter who the coach is, what team they play for, no matter what system they play.

At some point, you have to realize and acknowledge that the other teams have players and coaches, too. And as of this point in the season, the Flyers have one victory: Over the team that last year had the worst record in the entire league.

No one wants to be overly negative, and I understand your point on that. But moving a player or two out of the lineup or bringing in a player or two from elsewhere wouldn't exactly be breaking up the 1980s Edmonton Oilers.

That's just being honest. Not a native of Negadelphia, or a Kool-Aid Drinker. That's just reality.
- AllInForFlyers

His post really had zero to do with trying to make the team better. He didn't come close to stating that he doesn't want the team to make moves to improve the team.

There's a ying and a yang there. Yea, you might mitigate his defensive shortcomings. But you take away his strength and why you brought him onto the team. His ability to move the puck. And he is better at it then any other defenseman on the team, and he has shown that. When this team starts playing a much better team game, and get's far better at the possession game, Streit's puck abilities will be more apparent. Not in favor of that idea.
- MJL

Yin and Yang. Sorry, pet peeve.

And so far D hasn't been the problem with this team, but scoring has definitely been an issue, so I'd keep Streit in for now.

His post really had zero to do with trying to make the team better. He didn't come close to stating that he doesn't want the team to make moves to improve the team.
- MJL

No, his post was saying, "This defense is fine, don't criticize it, and if you do, learn some systems because you don't know hockey."

Bob McKenzie doesn't like our defense, either. Where should he go to learn hockey?

Let's see Berube scratch Rosehill first, then we can worry about Timonen.
- PLindbergh31

If biznarly wasn't playing rosebub would be out too

If biznarly wasn't playing rosebub would be out too
- Marc D

I'd rather they not try to match up tough guys and ice the roster that gives them the best chance at winning. That goes for anyone. If Toronto want so dress Colton Orr, fine, we'll skate circles around him and he leaves his team shorthanded.

I'd rather they not try to match up tough guys and ice the roster that gives them the best chance at winning. That goes for anyone. If Toronto want so dress Colton Orr, fine, we'll skate circles around him and he leaves his team shorthanded.
- jmatchett383

Yup. Goad him into bad penalties ala Rosehill.

No, his post was saying, "This defense is fine, don't criticize it, and if you do, learn some systems because you don't know hockey."

Bob McKenzie doesn't like our defense, either. Where should he go to learn hockey?
- AllInForFlyers

No that's not what his post was saying. He was talking about individual players and what they bring to the ice as an individual. Pretty much everyone including the guy who posted that is aware that the Flyers need to upgrade the team in certain spots. You completely missed his point.

It's similar to a team having 6 defenseman that are stay at home defensive defenseman . So now the team lacks puck skills on defense. So some will blame a player for being a stay at home defenseman, which is what he is, and scapegoat that player, for the downfall of the defense. Don't blame the player, blame the mix.

I wasn't referring to him specifically; just any player. You can get to the point where you have enough players with enough limitations that you have a bad team -- and no amount of coaching, "hard work" or "compete level" is going to change that.

A team of Mario Lemieuxs is going to score more than a team of Jay Rosehills. If a person can acknowledge that, then that same person can acknowledge that at some point, there is a "tipping point" where having that extra Mario Lemieux makes a difference and subtracting one more Jay Rosehill makes a difference.
- AllInForFlyers

I think they don't have a good mix on D right now, and I would love to see more puck possession type players on the team. I get what you are saying.

Playing Hartnell and Simmonds on the same line doesn't make a ton of sense to me either.

Yup. Goad him into bad penalties ala Rosehill.
- wolfhounds

Pretty much. Now, if you've got a situation a la Martin Havlat where there was an issue, I'm all for dressing a player who can handle it (cough James Neal cough). But dressing a goon just because the other player dresses a goon gives an advantage to the other team, they're already influencing your roster.

Now, if they're dressing or not dressing a skilled player or they're playing a particular defenseman or goalie and you think that your team will have an advantage over them, then I'd tweak the lineup. But dressing a fighter to counter a fighter seems silly to me. THUPER THILLY!

If biznarly wasn't playing rosebub would be out too
- Marc D

Rosehill plays tonight, I'm gonna take the accountability angle and pitbull it for eternity.

I'd rather they not try to match up tough guys and ice the roster that gives them the best chance at winning. That goes for anyone. If Toronto want so dress Colton Orr, fine, we'll skate circles around him and he leaves his team shorthanded.
- jmatchett383

I have to admit to missing the first part of this season but in the limited games I watched Rosehill last year I thought he was able to keep up with the rest of the fourth liners on most teams. I may change my opinion after seeing him play more, but he seemed to be slightly more then pure Neanderthal.

On the deep teams like Boston and Chicago and LA not so much, that is where having a guy like Talbot on the fourth line is a better match up.

I think they don't have a good mix on D right now, and I would love to see more puck possession type players on the team. I get what you are saying.

Playing Hartnell and Simmonds on the same line doesn't make a ton of sense to me either.
- Marc D

I agree about Hartnell and Simmonds. They're good on the PP as they're big bodies that can slam-dunk home pucks. Actually, Simmonds always tries that "drag it out from the side of the net and try to flip it home" play that NEVER WORKS. But if you want to use them as fairly stationary players that are the to cause havoc on a PP, fine. But their combined mobility can be an issue 5-on-5.

Rosehill plays tonight, I'm gonna take the accountability angle and pitbull it for eternity.
- PLindbergh31

I'm in agreement that Rosehill should not play tonight. But I'm not going to make a big deal out of it. But if Rosehill continues to make poor decisions, then it would be a big deal.

I have to admit to missing the first part of this season but in the limited games I watched Rosehill last year I thought he was able to keep up with the rest of the fourth liners on most teams. I may change my opinion after seeing him play more, but he seemed to be slightly more then pure Neanderthal.

On the deep teams like Boston and Chicago and LA not so much, that is where having a guy like Talbot on the fourth line is a better match up.
- Marc D

He's definitely 3 steps ahead on Shelley and twice as cheap. But really, he's nothing more than a spare forward, and I feel there are a few better options available to them.

I think they don't have a good mix on D right now, and I would love to see more puck possession type players on the team. I get what you are saying.

Playing Hartnell and Simmonds on the same line doesn't make a ton of sense to me either.
- Marc D

To be honest, I'm not for or against any line combos right now, because I'm absolutely willing to give Craig Berube's system a chance to work. Negadelphia doesn't apply there.

But not to the exclusion of the obvious: The defense does have a bad mix. It is too slow and needs better puck skills. However many players have to be swapped out to improve that, or whoever has to be swapped out, I'm totally fine with. Because at some point, everyone needs to "zoom out."

We aren't the defending champions of anything. So there's room for improvement, better players, more skill/speed/hockey IQ, whatever we're missing, until we are.

Pretty much. Now, if you've got a situation a la Martin Havlat where there was an issue, I'm all for dressing a player who can handle it (cough James Neal cough). But dressing a goon just because the other player dresses a goon gives an advantage to the other team, they're already influencing your roster.

Now, if they're dressing or not dressing a skilled player or they're playing a particular defenseman or goalie and you think that your team will have an advantage over them, then I'd tweak the lineup. But dressing a fighter to counter a fighter seems silly to me. THUPER THILLY!
- jmatchett383

I've never understood the need to dress a goon to counter a goon. The Flyers have guys like Hartnell, Simmonds, L Schenn and Rinaldo who will all drop the gloves with anyone if they need to.