- Giroux_Is_God

Perfect!

This is why I don't think Lavy is really a good coach. The good ones adjust their systems to better fit their talent, Lavy seems incapable of doing that.
- BiggE

I agree. I think he was a good coach for the team he inherited, but he isn't a guy who is going to get the best out of a rag tag team of underdogs.

Didn't Homer draft Hagg, Morin, Ghost, and trade for Alt? Seems like he's doing his best (late in his tenure) to draft/develop young D.
- jmatchett383

Exactly what I said in the third paragraph...all done in the last 3 years post Weber offer sheet.

I actually agree with MJL on this one. The difference is an individual mistake versus a mistake with greater long-term consequences. If the Flyers were not a deep-pockets team that could easily write off a 100 million dollars, OR if the league didn't allow the two compliance buyouts, then the Bryz signing would have set the organization back a half dozen years.

In terms of which mistake has had a great impact on the team today and unfortunately will continue to do so over the next 2 years or so, that is the inability to draft and develop defensemen.

The ripple effect of that strategy, or lack thereof, is a defense that lacks any true shutdown or Norris caliber defensemen but yet disproportionally is sucking up the salary cap.
- TheGreat28

Yes, but they also got extremely lucky that Mason worked out, otherwise we'd either have to give up good assets to fill the void or have some combo of players like Leighton and Emery in pipes full-time. I'd rather have stability in net (Bob) and work on defense than have a nice defense without a goalie who can stop a puck.

Props to Tangent_Man for getting the reference at the end of the last thread.

I'm jumping ship though here. Yikes.

I have to start studying for my exam tomorrow, while juggling 24/7 studying of PnT for the next 2 years.

Please keep me in your thoughts.
- Giroux_Is_God

Aw, shucks.

I don't think hindsight bias is involved with evaluating the Lavy situation. Many of us believed he should have been fired after the 2012-13 season at the latest. Firing him 3 games in just compounded the problem.
- NickTheKid87

truth.

I'm not missing your point. I just don't agree with the excuses attached to the Bryzgalov signing. I can, and will, dismiss the compliance buyout, because it was a deus ex machina which was never part of the picture when they devised this megaturd of a contract.

If you want to factor that in that's your right, but it's rose tinted logic in my judgement.
- BulliesPhan87

This is just boiling down to how we should look at the mistakes. Should they be viewed as the impact they had on things as they currently stand or the decision making that lead to the mistake in the first place? i.e. Bryz wasn't the biggest mistake because he's not affecting the team now or Bryz was the biggest mistake because of what could have happened when he was originally signed?

The risk of trading all of that talent for Pronger and the subsequent contract to the end of time was extremely high as well. I would not have taken on that risk. Long-term, Pronger not finishing out his contract and the ripple effect of salary juggling has put the organization in a huge bind.
- TheGreat28

The Pronger trade was a gamble, but you're talking about a HOF-caliber player who has performed at a Norris level basically every year since the mid-90s. Bryzgalov had one year where he played to Vezina-level in a very defense-oriented system.

The organization is not in a huge bind, according to MJL. The Flyers do not have cap issues.

Exactly. As soon as Pronger went down he had no choice.
- GOA88

This happened 2-3 years too late. It was easy to see that puck-moving defensemen were becoming a highly desirable commodity 3-4 years ago. Teams were beginning to lock up their best defensemen to long term contracts, trades like the Pronger trade were rare, and at exorbitant prices. I think Holmgren eventually righted the ship. But the damage is being felt now.

I would do that trade even if I had 4 NHL starting goalies. I just don't think they would have been looking for a reclamation project if they had the young, stud Bob ended up becoming.

My point is that the Flyers needed luck, lots of money and some shrewd moves to get out from under Bryz. Things could have been a lot worse.
- PhillySportsGuy

Oh, I absolutely agree. But given their (hypothetical) duo of Bob and Leighton, I think they'd still do the Mason deal if it were available. Then again, if we had Bob, maybe Columbus doesn't move Mason.

I actually agree with MJL on this one. The difference is an individual mistake versus a mistake with greater long-term consequences. If the Flyers were not a deep-pockets team that could easily write off a 100 million dollars, OR if the league didn't allow the two compliance buyouts, then the Bryz signing would have set the organization back a half dozen years.
- TheGreat28

Not sure you can isolate the folly of the Bryz signing from all the subsequent stuff that happened... Carter/Richards, Bob, not having the tagging space to re-sign Carle in-season... it's all interrelated.

This happened 2-3 years too late. It was easy to see that puck-moving defensemen were becoming a highly desirable commodity 3-4 years ago. Teams were beginning to lock up their best defensemen to long term contracts, trades like the Pronger trade were rare, and at exorbitant prices. I think Holmgren eventually righted the ship. But the damage is being felt now.
- TheGreat28

He took his best shots at Suter and Weber, premier NHL defenders. He signed Gustafsson and a FA and drafted MAB. He was rarely gifted with a high draft pick aside from the JvR year, the weakest first round in the last 15 or so years. If you want to blame him for trading picks, fine. But he did the best he could to acquire premier defenders through any means, and after he was unable to get the via trades/UFA, he started to draft them.

Not sure you can isolate the folly of the Bryz signing from all the subsequent stuff that happened... Carter/Richards, Bob, not having the tagging space to re-sign Carle in-season... it's all interrelated.
- Tomahawk

The argument going on here is purely philosophical/ideological. What should be the measuring stick: the moment the mistake was made or the results of the mistake? Some times mistakes lead to good results and good decisions lead to future failure.

Any preseason games being televised? I need hockey!

This is just boiling down to how we should look at the mistakes. Should they be viewed as the impact they had on things as they currently stand or the decision making that lead to the mistake in the first place? i.e. Bryz wasn't the biggest mistake because he's not affecting the team now or Bryz was the biggest mistake because of what could have happened when he was originally signed?
- NickTheKid87

I don't think drafting and developing D is the root of the problem either. The root of the problem is really how the Flyers used their picks. Homer used several picks to acquire players, he used most of his first round picks on forwards (not being critical of this) and he used some mid round picks on guys with limited upside (brutes).

These things prevent the team from adding depth to the farm system. Scouting is very important, but even the best scouts admit that the draft, particularly the mid-late rounds, is a bit of a lottery. The more tickets you have, the greater chance you have of winning. Homer just didn't have as many tickets as he should have.

Yes, but they also got extremely lucky that Mason worked out, otherwise we'd either have to give up good assets to fill the void or have some combo of players like Leighton and Emery in pipes full-time. I'd rather have stability in net (Bob) and work on defense than have a nice defense without a goalie who can stop a puck.
- jmatchett383

Yes, they did get very lucky with Mason. But here is a premise that I'm sure will get immediately rejected by many. I would never draft a goalie. Goalies are extremely hard to project, rarely work out statistically speaking and suck up valuable draft picks. I'd draft defensemen and highly-skilled forwards, let another team draft and develop the goalies and then flip a prospect or two, like Toronto with Bernier or the Devils with Schneider.

In other words, the Flyers got lucky with signing Bob, but could have easily traded for a goalie. A team can really have only one starting caliber goalie long-term so good ones are more likely to get traded than good defensemen.

- Giroux_Is_God

harvey.

Yes, they did get very lucky with Mason. But here is a premise that I'm sure will get immediately rejected by many. I would never draft a goalie. Goalies are extremely hard to project, rarely work out statistically speaking and suck up valuable draft picks. I'd draft defensemen and highly-skilled forwards, let another team draft and develop the goalies and then flip a prospect or two, like Toronto with Bernier or the Devils with Schneider.

In other words, the Flyers got lucky with signing Bob, but could have easily traded for a goalie. A team can really have only one starting caliber goalie long-term so good ones are more likely to get traded than good defensemen.
- TheGreat28

If that was a philosophy league-wide, no goalies would ever get drafted.

Also, Bob wasn't drafted.

The Pronger trade was a gamble, but you're talking about a HOF-caliber player who has performed at a Norris level basically every year since the mid-90s. Bryzgalov had one year where he played to Vezina-level in a very defense-oriented system.

The organization is not in a huge bind, according to MJL. The Flyers do not have cap issues.
- jmatchett383

Honestly, the chance that Pronger was going to play out that contract given his playing style was low, in my opinion. The eye injury was a freak accident. But remember he missed 50 games the year before with knee problems.

Why was Anaheim content to trade him away, or not willing to extend his contract to keep him?

The argument going on here is purely philosophical/ideological. What should be the measuring stick: the moment the mistake was made or the results of the mistake? Some times mistakes lead to good results and good decisions lead to future failure.
- NickTheKid87

Actually, what should be looked at is what caused him to make the mistake...

I think it was Mr. Snyder. I don't put this 100% on Homer. Ed wanted a bonified #1 goalie, Bryz was really the only one out there and Ed wanted to make a statement that the goalie-go-round in Philly was stopping, and he said so publicly...So I don't think Homer had much of a choice here and as the Coyote Fans pointed out immediately, we were screwed...Bryz was not that good...

If that was a philosophy league-wide, no goalies would ever get drafted.

Also, Bob wasn't drafted.
- jmatchett383

Well, goalies generally don't get first round priority at the draft.

I would never draft a goalie.
- TheGreat28

I actually agree with this 100%.

There was a study done awhile back that found that the rate of goalie picks panning out isn't considerably worse than dmen, but I'd still much rather identify a fully developed Mase/Bernier/Rask/Varly/Bob/Lehtonen/ Schneider/Bishop/etc as a trade target than roll the dice in the draft.

If that was a philosophy league-wide, no goalies would ever get drafted.

Also, Bob wasn't drafted.
- jmatchett383

How many NFL teams are using sports science today? How many will be 3 years from now if it works?

How many teams used the neutral-zone trap in the 93 (or whatever year NJ started). How many did it 2 years later?

You can go all the way back to Fred Shero days. Someone will always be the innovator. Then it gets copied.

Honestly, the chance that Pronger was going to play out that contract given his playing style was low, in my opinion. The eye injury was a freak accident. But remember he missed 50 games the year before with knee problems.

Why was Anaheim content to trade him away, or not willing to extend his contract to keep him?
- TheGreat28

Anaheim was able to trade him away because they had Scott Niedermayer, who was an even better HOF-caliber defenseman. They had that luxury.

Yes, Pronger was unlikely to finish out the contract (debateable) but that trade was made at a time when the Flyers felt he was the missing piece, which almost worked. The Bryz trade/sign was a panic/reactionary move.

I don't think drafting and developing D is the root of the problem either. The root of the problem is really how the Flyers used their picks. Homer used several picks to acquire players, he used most of his first round picks on forwards (not being critical of this) and he used some mid round picks on guys with limited upside (brutes).

These things prevent the team from adding depth to the farm system. Scouting is very important, but even the best scouts admit that the draft, particularly the mid-late rounds, is a bit of a lottery. The more tickets you have, the greater chance you have of winning. Homer just didn't have as many tickets as he should have.
- PhillySportsGuy

I don't think anything is the root of the problem, a combination of things are. The Flyers did draft and develop a good amount of forwards to be good NHLers but they can't say the same about defensemen. And even the dmen they did picked didn't turn into much of anything. Now with Timonen and Pronger gone, having no one internally to step in is hurting the Flyers.