A healthy Mason, & one more solid D man may have been the difference in the NY series.

It's really tempting, because the kids we have may still be 3 years away, (or more), and I worry Giroux may be "beaten up" by then.
- puckhead17

No doubt.

See, that's where the disconnect for me is... I saw a team that was pretty bad elevated by great special teams and sometimes-brilliant goaltending. 5V5, parts of the Rangers series looked like Generals vs Globetrotters.

If the special teams are just a few % worse, I'm not sure they even make the PO's at all.
- Tomahawk

Great special teams and brilliant goaltending are key for good teams. The 5on5 must improve. Play anther year under Chief's system add some speed and stabilize D. It doesn't have to be a number one guy. Just a solid top 4 who can eat ice time and hit the net! Timo would be a great 3rd pairing IF he is willing to take a big pay cut.
I don't Giroux getting the crap beat out of him waiting for our prospects to develop

No doubt.
- wolfhounds

100% agree

No doubt.
- wolfhounds

I thought there was a noticeable difference after we acquired A. Mac, it really makes you wonder, what if.........

This is where I am at with the team.

As fans, don't make the same mistakes Leafs fans made after last year. They hung with the Bruins in the first round of the playoffs and felt like contenders. How'd that carry over to this year?

The Flyers are not close to being contenders.
- johndewar

Frightening but apt analogy.

Avs, Flyers and Habs are all in for a rude awakening next season. You can't be terrible 5V5 and hope to sustain success.

Great special teams and brilliant goaltending are key for good teams. The 5on5 must improve. Play anther year under Chief's system add some speed and stabilize D. It doesn't have to be a number one guy. Just a solid top 4 who can eat ice time and hit the net! Timo would be a great 3rd pairing IF he is willing to take a big pay cut.
I don't Giroux getting the crap beat out of him waiting for our prospects to develop
- 3flyerkids

Agreed!

Just got the email for my draft tickets. Have to login at 1pm on Wednesday. Because that is convenient.

I dont see the point in moving BSchenn. Move Vinny. Sign BSchenn. Bring Read up to the 2nd line LW spot. Call it a day.

And good god, moving Coburn for Tyler Myers alone would be close to a lateral move. People just want to throw in BSchenn as well?
- hereticpride

Did the email let you know what the tickets were going to cost?

Frightening but apt analogy.

Avs, Flyers and Habs are all in for a rude awakening next season. You can't be terrible 5V5 and hope to sustain success.
- Tomahawk

I think they can make some minor tweaks in the forwards and really get a lot better at 5v5.

Making the necessary changes to the defense will be too expensive in terms of money and/or assets. Might as well upgrade what you can.

A 2nd and 4th line that can keep up with the play would make this team much better at 5v5.

Why anybody would want to trade Coburn is beyond me. And trading him for a defender simply creates a hole that you then fill with the trade, except it apparently cost you a couple extra players and a pick.

No.

As for Schenn, somewhere around $2 million should be good for his bridge contract as that is more real in-the-checking-account money than he's ever earned in the NHL by a fair amount, and it gives him incentive to push on up to the next level.
- wolfhounds

Here's the problem with hole theory. For example we traded carter arguably your best scoring center to Columbus. That was a big hole created in theory. But we got checky and coots. We filled 2 big holes. No if it's a 1 hole for 1 hole trade and we fill the bigger more important hole that's worth it. So if for example we trade a #2 center and #3/4 dman but land a #1 dman or top scoring winger to play with g that's worth it and improves the team.

So you just trade away BSchenn because Vinny cant be moved? I dont like that. You find the money elsewhere to keep him. Trade Grossmann for a cheaper option. Offer Kimmo what he is actually worth at this point (very little imo). Find a way to keep him. Laughton aside our top 5 prospects are all D men. I'm not sure what trading a talented young forward for even more accomplishes.
- hereticpride

No I don't want to trade Schenn. I was pointing out the obvious. I would trade Grossmann and try to promote from within. The only way Timonen returns is at "the hometown discount" because he will get what wants on the open market. At 39 he still logs big minutes and is a proven two-way d-man. You are right about the prospects, they should have taken one last year in the first round. They were available( Max Domi, Wennberg, Curtis Lazar, Kerby Rychel, Anthony Mantha) to name a few.

Here's the problem with hole theory. For example we traded carter arguably your best scoring center to Columbus. That was a big hole created in theory. But we got checky and coots. We filled 2 big holes. No if it's a 1 hole for 1 hole trade and we fill the bigger more important hole that's worth it. So if for example we trade a #2 center and #3/4 dman but land a #1 dman or top scoring winger to play with g that's worth it and improves the team.
- Sms401

The Carter trade is starting to give me a stomach ache, I like Voracek, & Couts, but, never mind, stay the course.

I think they can make some minor tweaks in the forwards and really get a lot better at 5v5.

Making the necessary changes to the defense will be too expensive in terms of money and/or assets. Might as well upgrade what you can.

A 2nd and 4th line that can keep up with the play would make this team much better at 5v5.
- PhillySportsGuy

Unfortunately, I think the bulk of the issue is from the back-end... retrieval and transition is still spotty, and d-zone coverage is atrocious. They just can't get the puck back when they lose it.

I agree, though... some improvements up front and more conscientious puck-management overall should at least prevent the team from losing the puck as often... that's a start.

Here's the problem with hole theory. For example we traded carter arguably your best scoring center to Columbus. That was a big hole created in theory. But we got checky and coots. We filled 2 big holes. No if it's a 1 hole for 1 hole trade and we fill the bigger more important hole that's worth it. So if for example we trade a #2 center and #3/4 dman but land a #1 dman or top scoring winger to play with g that's worth it and improves the team.
- Sms401

Are you saying Coburn is a 3/4 defenseman?

Are you saying Coburn is a 3/4 defenseman?
- PhillySportsGuy

I see Coburn's game excelling if another solid piece is added.

Unfortunately, I think the bulk of the issue is from the back-end... retrieval and transition is still spotty, and d-zone coverage is atrocious. They just can't get the puck back when they lose it.

I agree, though... some improvements up front and more conscientious puck-management overall should at least prevent the team from losing the puck as often... that's a start.


- Tomahawk

Top line was a strong puck possession group. 2nd line was strong when VL was not on the line. 3rd line would be better with a whole year of Akeson and being put in more offensive situations. 4th line would be good with Raffl and, hopefully, Laughton.

To me, the best thing you can do is upgrade the forwards by adding depth and hope it translates into better 5v5 play. They're already very strong on special teams. If they can break even at 5v5, that should put them in the playoffs.

I see Coburn's game excelling if another solid piece is added.
- puckhead17

He's good when you give him another good defenseman. He's not the type to be the lead guy on a pair. I think he can be the shutdown guy on a top pairing. Flyers just don't have the other guy to pair with him right now.

Unfortunately, I think the bulk of the issue is from the back-end... retrieval and transition is still spotty, and d-zone coverage is atrocious. They just can't get the puck back when they lose it.

I agree, though... some improvements up front and more conscientious puck-management overall should at least prevent the team from losing the puck as often... that's a start.


- Tomahawk

Bad D zone coverage was a total team issue.

Are you saying Coburn is a 3/4 defenseman?
- PhillySportsGuy

Slotted properly yeah. He's a decent dman. But not a #1 or 1a unless maybe just maybe he's with a hall o famer but then again who doesn't look good in that spot.

He's good when you give him another good defenseman. He's not the type to be the lead guy on a pair. I think he can be the shutdown guy on a top pairing. Flyers just don't have the other guy to pair with him right now.
- PhillySportsGuy

His deficiencies are magnified when he plays too many minutes.

Slotted properly yeah. He's a decent dman. But not a #1 or 1a unless maybe just maybe he's with a hall o famer but then again who doesn't look good in that spot.
- Sms401

I think he's more of a 2/3. He's a prototypical defensive defenseman. He was slotted as our #1 this year and held his own. That was without another top pairing guy to help out. If you give him another top pairing guy (not even a true #1), he would look even better.

His deficiencies are magnified when he plays too many minutes.
- puckhead17

I've always felt it was about partner more than # of minutes. When he was paired with mid 30s Kimmo, he looked really good and logged a ton of minutes in 2010 playoffs.

See, that's where the disconnect for me is... I saw a team that was pretty bad elevated by great special teams and sometimes-brilliant goaltending. 5V5, parts of the Rangers series looked like Generals vs Globetrotters.

If the special teams are just a few % worse, I'm not sure they even make the PO's at all.
- Tomahawk

this, this and, of course, this...

The Carter trade is starting to give me a stomach ache, I like Voracek, & Couts, but, never mind, stay the course.
- puckhead17

Not to hash on the weber thing but say we traded coots and schenn for weber as what was commonly reported we turned down. In essence we would have traded frick & frack for jake/simmonds& mofo WEBER!!!! Damn homer married to his players

People making the comments about moving Coburn plus for Myers... That would not fix anything on the backend. Myers is not a #1 in my opinion and makes just as many if not more mistakes in his own end as Coburn does not to mention he's probably not as good a skater as Coburn.

I think he's more of a 2/3. He's a prototypical defensive defenseman. He was slotted as our #1 this year and held his own. That was without another top pairing guy to help out. If you give him another top pairing guy (not even a true #1), he would look even better.
- PhillySportsGuy

This is where a guy like Myers would help!
Physical, size, with some offensive skill.