Lets try this on for size. You are missing the point.
- jak521

Another response from you that fails to even address the point made.

My post explained my point perfectly.

The risk is not hindsight. It was a ridiculously high-risk move that, again, was panned widely at the time of the deal. No hinsight/heresay needed.

I'm right, you're wrong. Look at the facts and you'll understand that.
- jmatchett383

The risk was there the day the contract was signed. The hindsight part comes in after knowing how the player played, and didn't live up to the contract. Making it a mistake.

Yeah pretty much. Though for me, when I look at which of the two is affecting the team now and for a few more years down the road....the answer is obvious. And that to me, makes it a bigger mistake.
- MBFlyerfan

They're different things really. Both MJL and BulliesPhan aren't wrong in how they are presenting their opinions. Isolated mistakes have value when you're evaluating certain individuals but the effects from mistakes are better for judging groups or situations as a whole.

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

Exactly!

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

We can discuss the cap if you like. The Flyers are always going to be a team that is up against the cap, most likely. But yet every season, they are able to add players and improve the team, or at least make moves that they think will improve the team. That is not a sign of a team that has cap issues. You may not agree with their philosophy of how they use their cap space, but that's more about player evaluations then a cap mismanagement issue.

There are no excuses, only facts. If there is going to be a comparison made to come to a conclusion of what mistake was the bigger mistake, then the impact on the team should be considered as a variable when comparing mistakes. That is only logical.

It is a fact that the compliance buyout significantly lowered the impact on the team from the mistake in signing Bryzgalov. To the point where it basically only affected the team for two seasons. You could make some reasonable, but speculative arguments that other things could've been different, but that can't be made factually.

I think if we look at how the team's failure under Holmgren to draft and develop defenseman has affected the team. It has affected them for longer then two seasons, and continues to affect them today. And in my opinion, that mistake has had a bigger impact on the team, then the Bryzgalov signing has.

Which brings to the only point I was making. In that in my opinion, the failure to draft and develop defenseman was a bigger failure under Holmgren then the Bryzgalov signing was. And not in any way to make an excuse for the signing, or to state that the signing wasn't a big mistake. Because it was.

Now feel free to show how there is any rose colored logic being implied here.
- MJL

it's over, bro

Yeah pretty much. Though for me, when I look at which of the two is affecting the team now and for a few more years down the road....the answer is obvious. And that to me, makes it a bigger mistake.
- MBFlyerfan

I think the fact that we can even compare an isolated, single move to a whole trend of failure speaks volumes to the former.

edit: but it's still totally over




bro

They're different things really. Both MJL and BulliesPhan aren't wrong in how they are presenting their opinions. Isolated mistakes have value when you're evaluating certain individuals but the effects from mistakes are better for judging groups or situations as a whole.
- NickTheKid87

I guess you could say that, but in the end, you can evaluate them on the same plane as to which affected the team more negatively and for a longer period of time.

So I put the question this way. Which move affected the Flyers worse right now and moving forward? Signing Bryz, or not drafting and developing quality defensemen?

As has been said, signing Bryz was a huge mistake, but was it because of the contract or his play, or both? If he was still with the team and playing well, would it be a mistake? Or is the size of the contract what made it such a bad mistake regardless of how he played.

I didn't like the signing at the time, but I also thought that Bryz was a good goalie at the time of the signing....and so did most everyone else. So in my mind, the term and amount was what made it a mistake. He actually didn't play all that bad, BUT he did play bad for what they were paying him.

We can have 10 more pages of a giant pissing match if we want. But let us not quibble over who killed who! This is supposed to be a happy occasion!

The bottom line, whether or not the mistake is drafting & developing a balanced team or handing out a truly awful contract that got erased by a mulligan, is did the team learn?

One could say that in the case of drafting & developing Holmgren did eventually correct his course. In the case of the Bryz deal being bad, it's debatable. He immediately used the cap space to sign long term deals with two veterans whose status by the end of the contracts would be questionable.

Mistakes are not a killer, failure to learn from them are

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

They had the tagging space to re-sign Carle beofre re-signing Grossmann. We don't know what happened during the season as far as the time table of how negotiations were proceeeding with each individual player. It could very well have been that they just happened to come to an agreement with Grossmann first. And chose to go ahead with that deal. Tagging space can be made if it is really an issue.

If he was still with the team and playing well, would it be a mistake? Or is the size of the contract what made it such a bad mistake regardless of how he played.
- MBFlyerfan

The latter.

They're really lucky he showed his true colors during the CBO period, instead of falling apart after they wouldn't be able to get rid of him.

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

Absolutely. Good points. There were really 3 phases under Holmgren. Building the team up from last overall. Getting to the point where he felt with a few moves the team could be a contender, leading to trading a number of picks in an efort to win now. And then finally the abrupt changes, and the Richards/Carter deals, leading to a commitment to keeping picks for the most part, and building for the future, and a youth movement.

The latter.

They're really lucky he showed his true colors during the CBO period, instead of falling apart after they wouldn't be able to get rid of him.
- Tomahawk

I tend to agree. I think the contract was shockingly brutal. Especially in the light in that the Flyers basically big against themselves.

I wanted them to stick with Bob at the time, and felt he was misused during the playoffs. But, now we have Mason, and I am pretty confident in him moving forward.

Simmonds will wear an A, per Dave Isaac
- Jsaquella

simmer up

The bottom line, whether or not the mistake is drafting & developing a balanced team or handing out a truly awful contract that got erased by a mulligan, is did the team learn?

One could say that in the case of drafting & developing Holmgren did eventually correct his course. In the case of the Bryz deal being bad, it's debatable. He immediately used the cap space to sign long term deals with two veterans whose status by the end of the contracts would be questionable.

Mistakes are not a killer, failure to learn from them are
- Jsaquella

Well said.

Didn't Vinny wear it once or twice last year or am I remembering incorrectly?
- NickTheKid87

Yes.

So lets investigate that a bit further...

Should we look at all of the draft picks chosen under Homer?

2006- 2nd, 2nd, 6th * First year before Homer
2007- 2nd rounder
2008- 1st, 3rd
2009-10: No picks until round three, 3rd, 3rd, 6th, 7th, 7th
2011- 4th
2012- 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th
2013- 1st, 2nd, 5th, 7th
2014- 1st, 3rd, 7th

During that span the Flyers drafted 49 players... 22 of which were d-men. That is 44% of all players drafted being d-men.
- jak521

And how many turned out to be good picks, and were developed into quality NHL defenseman?

For sure. I don't think it exonerates Holmgren from all blame, but I do think his hand was forced.
- BulliesPhan87

I think he was mandated to fix the goaltending issue. But I think choosing Bryzgalov was purely Holmgren's decision, in my opinion.

And how many turned out to be good picks, and were developed into quality NHL defenseman?
- MJL

1 if you count Sbisa.

I think he was mandated to fix the goaltending issue. But I think choosing Bryzgalov was purely Holmgren's decision, in my opinion.
- MJL

We'll never know for sure.

We'll never know for sure.
- BulliesPhan87

Mysteries of the Museum.

1 if you count Sbisa.
- Streit2ThePoint

4 to 5 others with potential.

Sort of Disagree. Homer was maybe slow to the Drafting D party but he was the guy who got Sanheim, Morin, Haag and Gostisbehere
- xShoot4WarAmpsx

They attempted to rectify an orginizational weakness towards the end of Holmgren's tenure. But the jury is still out on those players. And Sanheim was Hextall's pick.

We'll never know for sure.
- BulliesPhan87

Snider explicitly said that he didn't tell Homer which goalie to choose.

Q: In hindsight, do you wish the team was more patient with Sergei Bobrovsky, or are you happy with the way things turned out with Mason here?

Snider: “Well, obviously, you don’t like to let a kid like that go. I was responsible, not for picking anybody (such as Bryzgalov). I was responsible for saying, ‘We can't have this goalie situation like we had.’ So the organization met. All the hockey guys met and they graded all the different people that might be available, and Bryzgalov was at the top. Now that may be an indictment of our scouting or whatever you want to call it, but we went out to get the guy. Then, the problem is, not only did we make a mistake on the long-term contract, but Bobrovksy's a young guy and he told Paul, ‘As soon as my contract's up, I'm out of here.’ He wasn't going to re-sign with us. He was going to go back to Russia. He was going to go with another team. But he wasn't going to be a second-string goalie for the rest of his life. So that was also a problem, and Paul made the best of the situation. It's not that we didn't like Bobrovsky. The whole thing was a fiasco. And we can't look back. What happened, happened, and here we are. But then Paul made another great move in picking up Mason, who's not chopped liver.”

Homer and the pro scouts really ignored all the red flags and went w/ the BNA.

4 to 5 others with potential.
- mayorofangrytown

Yes