meanwhile 6-8 future hall of famers about to enter the Association
- Crimsoninja

- ob18

It's also not a coincidence that Bryz (and many of the other notorious July 1 signings) end up getting bought out... the gap between real and perceived value was just too enormous to continue living with.
- Tomahawk

How many July 1 Free Agent signings specifically, have been bought out?

Who exactly mans the Flyers blue line with no Streit, MacDonald and Kimo out there?

if one guy is willing to pay $100K for the one 2015 Ford F150 arriving in town, should that dictate that everyone pay $100K for the 10 more arriving next week? Or does that mean the one guy has no patience and deserves what he gets?
- wilsonecho91

Exactly my point.

We're talking about 4/5 defensemen. Those are not exactly scarce. That's why I used the F-150 analogy, because they are plentiful. They're sturdy, reliable and common.

Now different F-150's have different features. Some have a CD player. Some have a sun roof. Some have automatic transmission. It might be a used lot of F-150's that can affect the price.

You might have a 4/5 defenseman that can skate well or play the puck decently, while another 4/5 defenseman is physical, but slower and not as good with the puck. It's a manager's job to weigh the assets and decide whether a guy who is a bit better is worth the extra cash.

Going back to the Hainsey/Gilbert vs MacDonald comparison. I'd rather have a 4/5 guy like Hainsey who might not be as good as MacDonald, but costs $3mm less, because it's a better value for my finite cap space.

The other point is, do I want a long term solution over a stop gap? Sure. Ideally a long term solution is better, but if I'm paying a marked up rate for that long term solution is it better? If I buy a brand new F-150 for $25K is that a better value than a 2 year old one with 40,000 miles on it at $10K?

Ill go ahead and disagree with you here. I think the Flyers were impatient, misread the market, and paid way over market value for Bryzgalov. What Vokuon signed for later that offseason pretty much told us that. The Flyers essentially bid against themselves in this case. Now, this is just an opinion. And yes hindsight CAN be used to analyze their decision.
- MBFlyerfan

There were a lot of folks shredding the decision when it was being announced. That wasn't hindsight.

There were a lot of folks shredding the decision when it was being announced. That wasn't hindsight.
- Jsaquella

Including me, but I was specifically addressing something MJL said. Personally I was ready to go with Bob. I mean we wont rehash this again, but I felt they misused him terribly in the playoffs the season before, basically benching him after one mediocre period. IN HINDSIGHT the way Lavy handled the goaltending that playoff he should have been fired.

I think you can make that case. But I think it's more that Bryzgalov was the player they identified and wanted, to shore up the goaltender spot. And in that case, the player has the leverage. And in order to keep the cap hit down, they went to a back diving contract, and added a bunch of years. The only way the Flyers could've done differently there, is if they were willing to settle for someone else, instead of Bryzgalov. Obviously he is the player they targeted, and that they felt would solve the goaltending issues. And that's the only player they were negotiating with. And at that time, that's what the market was. I don't think it's fair to look back at how the market was a month or two later, when that is not the position the Flyers were in at the time. There's no doubt that they put themselves in that position, but it was on their terms. And that's how they viewed it. In their mind they wanted a Cadillac, and were willing to pay for it. And they weren't willing to settle for the second choice of a Chevy. It didn't work out. But the only reason it didn't work out was because Bryzgalov didn't play well enough. And who's fault is that?
If I use hindsight to judge moves a team makes, I'm going to be right 100% of the time. I wish the Flyers could have the same ability.
- MJL

the admins who gave him such a handsome contract for such shoddy play

Including me, but I was specifically addressing something MJL said. Personally I was ready to go with Bob. I mean we wont rehash this again, but I felt they misused him terribly in the playoffs the season before, basically benching him after one mediocre period. IN HINDSIGHT the way Lavy handled the goaltending that playoff he should have been fired.
- MBFlyerfan

I get that. but at the same time, there were plenty of people ripping the deal before hindsight was even part of the picture.

It's not like everyone said, "Man, that's a solid deal", and then he sucked.

Exactly my point.

We're talking about 4/5 defensemen. Those are not exactly scarce. That's why I used the F-150 analogy, because they are plentiful. They're sturdy, reliable and common.

Now different F-150's have different features. Some have a CD player. Some have a sun roof. Some have automatic transmission. It might be a used lot of F-150's that can affect the price.

You might have a 4/5 defenseman that can skate well or play the puck decently, while another 4/5 defenseman is physical, but slower and not as good with the puck. It's a manager's job to weigh the assets and decide whether a guy who is a bit better is worth the extra cash.

Going back to the Hainsey/Gilbert vs MacDonald comparison. I'd rather have a 4/5 guy like Hainsey who might not be as good as MacDonald, but costs $3mm less, because it's a better value for my finite cap space.

The other point is, do I want a long term solution over a stop gap? Sure. Ideally a long term solution is better, but if I'm paying a marked up rate for that long term solution is it better? If I buy a brand new F-150 for $25K is that a better value than a 2 year old one with 40,000 miles on it at $10K?
- Jsaquella

This is where the difference is. Each person views the asset differently. And places a different value on the F150. I think calling MacDonald a 4/5 defenseman is wrong. I think he's #3. And I think the Flyers feel the same way.
You're placing MacDonald in the same class as players such as Hainsey and Gilbert. I disagree with that also. I think he's significantly better. And to speculate, I think the Flyers do also. And feel that he's more then a bit better. And I agree with them.
And as far as the last point is concerned, how long do want to keep the truck for? If you're looking to keep it long term, you buy a new one. If you're looking to keep it for a short term, until another F150 is ready, maybe you buy the used one. All about perspective.

the admins who gave him such a handsome contract for such shoddy play
- stayinthefnnet

The shoddy play came after they gave him the contract.

I get that. but at the same time, there were plenty of people ripping the deal before hindsight was even part of the picture.

It's not like everyone said, "Man, that's a solid deal", and then he sucked.
- Jsaquella

There's always people who rip a deal when it's made. What decides whether they're right or wrong, is how the player plays.

is there really that huge a difference between a "#3" and "#4" defenseman?

is there really that huge a difference between a "#3" and "#4" defenseman?
- Crimsoninja

Not really. And it's really subjective. Everyone has their own way of rating a player. But teams don't give defenseman a 5M a year deal if they feel that he's a 3rd pair defenseman.

The shoddy play came after they gave him the contract.
- MJL

The thing is, the pay set the bar higher than he could possibly achieve since he was way overpaid for his talent level.

is there really that huge a difference between a "#3" and "#4" defenseman?
- Crimsoninja

To me, it's just an easy way to designate a guy. If I feel a guy is a capable second pair guy, but a good third pair guy, I'd call him a 4/5.

So in my opinion, a guy like Coburn is a 2/3, he can be used on a first pair with a good partner. He can be very good in a second pair role.

In that same vein, most of the other Flyers defensemen are(again, IMO) 4/5 guys. They can be used on the second pair, but they're not really the anchor of a good second pair.

So, If I call a guy a number 3 defenseman, he's a guy I feel can anchor a good second pair. If I call him a four, I feel he can play second pair, but he shouldn't be the best guy on that pair.

is there really that huge a difference between a "#3" and "#4" defenseman?
- Crimsoninja

In my head, the gap is there -- but that's just me. I think MacDonald's a No. 4, but I'm also on record as saying it's not a crime to be that.

The only problem I have with MacDonald is his contract; it's just my opinion that the term and salary is more than what I consider him to be. I'm trying to,work past that, though.

The thing is, the pay set the bar higher than he could possibly achieve since he was way overpaid for his talent level.
- MBFlyerfan

I don't think he was way overpaid. He was a Vezina Trophy finalist. I don't think talent was the issue at all. I think the problems were all mental, and not being able to handle the pressure, as well as just being a nutcase.

In my view, MacDonald is absolutely a player that can anchor a 2nd pair. He can play high minutes in all situations. He shouldn't be used on a regular basis to check top lines, but he can certainly take his share of shifts against that caliber of competition, with the right support.

2010 bos game 7 on csn. Jvr just scored.

So you're flat-out guaranteeing that trading for Florida's No. 1 is getting us to the Promised Land, then?
- AllInForFlyers

I would think that would be more reasonable than expecting the same defense (but aged a year) to do anything better next year than last.

I'll just say this and move on:

I don't harp on everything the Flyers do as bad. In fact, I try to take an optimistic view most of the time. However, given some of the deals the Flyers have handed out, and the end result of some of those deals, it's completely fair to question the decision making process at times.

Ilya Bryzgalov, signed to a massive deal, bought out after two years. Vinny Lecavalier, signed to a significant deal, being shopped around 12 months later. Two players that signed long terms deals (Jeff Carter & JvR) who were traded before they had played a single minute for the Flyers under them. This team had the highest paid defense corps in the NHL and it's considered a weak spot by most people who analyze the game.

That's not to entirely throw them under the bus. They're a competitive team. They make good decisions in a lot of cases, because if they didn't, they'd be the Isles or Leafs.

But being concerned that they're spending $12.1mm a year on Nicklas Grossmann, Luke Schenn and Andrew MacDonald is far from shredding them and being overly critical. It's possible to understand the rationale behind the decisions they made and disagree with them.

I would think that would be more reasonable than expecting the same defense (but aged a year) to do anything better next year than last.
- aflyerpower8

Hey, I understand that. We can agree to,disagree, but I do,understand your point.

I'll just say this and move on:

I don't harp on everything the Flyers do as bad. In fact, I try to take an optimistic view most of the time. However, given some of the deals the Flyers have handed out, and the end result of some of those deals, it's completely fair to question the decision making process at times.

Ilya Bryzgalov, signed to a massive deal, bought out after two years. Vinny Lecavalier, signed to a significant deal, being shopped around 12 months later. Two players that signed long terms deals (Jeff Carter & JvR) who were traded before they had played a single minute for the Flyers under them. This team had the highest paid defense corps in the NHL and it's considered a weak spot by most people who analyze the game.

That's not to entirely throw them under the bus. They're a competitive team. They make good decisions in a lot of cases, because if they didn't, they'd be the Isles or Leafs.

But being concerned that they're spending $12.1mm a year on Nicklas Grossmann, Luke Schenn and Andrew MacDonald is far from shredding them and being overly critical. It's possible to understand the rationale behind the decisions they made and disagree with them.
- Jsaquella

Move on already, we have the draft coming up

Move on already, we have the draft coming up
- ob18

I'm reading, that's why posts are spaced out.