I think Byfuglien will retire before this rumor will be.
- aflyerpower8

While I am pretty sure Byf would help this team, I'm not sure if the cost would be worth it.

Unless its like B and L Schenn for Byf and a pick. Then I say go go go.

Akeson is miscast playing a fourth line role. I understand the notion of earning your opportunities, but asking a young player to prove himself as a physical checking forward so he can earn a spot as a winger on a scoring line is contradictory. Especially when you consider his relatively strong showing on a more skilled line during last year's playoff series against the Rangers.

While I'm very much in favor of having a skilled fourth line, Akeson isn't ideally suited for that kind of role (and we have other semi-skilled types that can play that role just as well). Akeson's hands and hockey sense are consistent with a top-six type role.

Right now the creative plays he's making on the fourth line are dying on the stick of Zac Rinaldo, who is getting over twice as many shots per game as he usually does (due to) playing with Akeson, but doing nothing with them. I can't help but wonder what would happen if those passes were to the likes of Read, Simmer, Couturier Schenn...people like to knock his defensive play, but again, let's not forget last season when Akeson looked pretty damn good with Coots and Read, even with the tough matchups that line drew. Impressively, advanced stats show Akeson led the team in puck possession stats during the series. Those stats continue to show he's been strong in defensive play and possession this season. I'm tired of seeing people reach to point out Akeson's weaknesses, some of which aren't even there.


Akeson has done everything the org has asked and has performed well in doing so. He paid his dues in the minors, worked hard and improved his defensive game under Murray and proven he can play with men. He's too talented to play 9 mins of checking a game with no PP time. It would behoove the Flyers to give him linemates that are better able to take advantage of his ability to make plays. He should also get more cracks at the shootout. The Flyers had enough scouting acumen to sign this kid and showed the patience to groom him slowly and mold him into a player. I hope they don't waste their investment. Akeson has at some point led every team he's played on in points. He's far too skilled to be relegated to a fourth line and I think it's a very bad idea to use his performance in that role as a measuring stick to judge his value as an NHL'er. Let's see what he can do playing with other skilled guys. I'd say put him back with Read and Coots. I think good things will happen.
- exlund

WRONG akeson would not he playing agains the joke competition he gets against other 4th liners so he won't be completing the same passes

Going by this Buff is back on the wing.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/pl...IPerGame&viewName=summary

Bogo
Trouba
Enstrom
Stuart
Pardy
Postma

Akeson is miscast playing a fourth line role. I understand the notion of earning your opportunities, but asking a young player to prove himself as a physical checking forward so he can earn a spot as a winger on a scoring line is contradictory. Especially when you consider his relatively strong showing on a more skilled line during last year's playoff series against the Rangers.

While I'm very much in favor of having a skilled fourth line, Akeson isn't ideally suited for that kind of role (and we have other semi-skilled types that can play that role just as well). Akeson's hands and hockey sense are consistent with a top-six type role.

Cont.
- exlund

Well said. The biggest thing to me is that there are other players that can be as effective or more effective in Akeson's place. VandeVelde, Jones even Leier and Laughton to an extent. You could also bump Umberger down there so it's not like Berube has no other choice then to play Akeson on the 4th line. He's being asked to do things that he's not good at while the things he's actually good at are nullified. Like you said, the idea that a player needs to prove himself in one role in order to get an opportunity to play a distinctively different role is a bit bizarre.

Going by this Buff is back on the wing.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/pl...IPerGame&viewName=summary

Bogo
Trouba
Enstrom
Stuart
Pardy
Postma
- Feanor

Yup and 11 forwards have played 3 games while three have played 1. Looks like he's a winger at least for the first 3 games.

Yup and 11 forwards have played 3 games while three have played 1. Looks like he's a winger at least for the first 3 games.
- NickTheKid87

Does he actually prefer playing D to being a forward? I have no idea.

Does he actually prefer playing D to being a forward? I have no idea.
- Feanor

I have no idea. I would venture to guess that he doesn't care but I have nothing to back that up.

I have no idea. I would venture to guess that he doesn't care but I have nothing to back that up.
- NickTheKid87

He prefers Golden Corral's all you can eat buffet

Does he actually prefer playing D to being a forward? I have no idea.
- Feanor

No, he wants to (and should) play defense.

He prefers Golden Corral's all you can eat buffet
- BiggE

Who doesn't?

So it's insane to expect a player to bypass his potential (which is very open-ended), but it's totally fine to expect a player noted for his offensive prowess and defensive deficiencies to turn his entire game around and become a defensive player while still scoring goals playing on lines not noted for scoring?

Hot it.
- jmatchett383

Show me where I said I expect Akeson to turn his game around and become a defensive player, while also still scoring goals? I simply said that at 24 years old, and a rookie who has played all of 12 NHL games or so, can improve as a player! And he can improve his all around play to still be an effective player without the puck.

But somehow you twisted that all around into the above, and replied with Matt Konan becoming a top pair defenseman as a sarcastic response.

Botom line, tell me how saying that Akeson can improve as an all around player, and how that is comparable to your sarcastic response of Konan becoming a top pairing defenseman?

If you could have any one player from the 1994 draft for the duration of their career, who would you take?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_NHL_Entry_Draft
- jmatchett383

Alfredson over Elias

- Tomahawk

That was a great post, wasn't it?

I don't understand player development, much of the time. I question things that coaches do, and since they are paid to do what they do and lose their jobs if they don't do it well enough, you have to hope they know what they're doing, at some level.

But sometimes, you do have to wonder. Zac Rinaldo has champions on the coaching staff, and because he clearly works hard on the ice, he gets opportunities. That's fine. That's how it's supposed to work. Rinaldo gets time on the PK in games.

But Jason Akeson's worked hard, too, going from undrafted player to a stint in the ECHL, to surviving and improving under a structured coach like Terry Murray, to finally getting a roster spot on the Flyers. He paid his dues in the minors, which is also how it's supposed to work.

So to me, isn't it a fair question to ask that if Rinaldo's skillset lends to work on the PK, and he's requested to be on it and has a champion or two in the organization, and his hard work is being rewarded with some shifts, what doesn't Jason Akeson do to be given the same opportunity on the second PP unit, which hasn't done much of anything for years now?

That's what I don't understand about player development. I understand that Akeson isn't a Top 6 player who gets 20 minutes a game. Totally fine with that, actually. But I don't understand how Akeson's path is so different from Rinaldo's that putting the player on a dysfunctional second unit is viewed as some type of mystical reward that has to be "earned," but Zac Rinaldo's is already earned because of what, exactly?

It's OK to develop BOTH players, with their skillsets.

He prefers Golden Corral's all you can eat buffet
- BiggE

From what I've seen, Berube's system is pretty simple, which is not a criticism, as a simple system can work if the players execute it properly. Basically he is using a 2 man forecheck with the 3rd forward remaining high in the zone. The D can freely pinch, but the winger on that side needs to rotate back when they do so. Odd man rushes against will and have occurred when forwards fail to do this. Also the system works better when the attacking player carries the puck into the zone, rather than dumps it in which has been one of the Flyers problems this season.

Also, I can spell intricacies, LOL.
- BiggE

Every system is pretty simple. First of all, success rate of carry ins versus dump ins has nothing to do with systems.
You gave a good description. Berube's forecheck scheme is a Center lock forecheck, is which the first two forwards, normally the wingers, go hard on the puck on the forecheck, while the center or the forward assuming the center position, locks on the weak side to protect against reverses and breakouts. It's a read and react between the forward and the defenseman on pinching or not. If the defenseman pinches, then the center backs him up.

Now explain to me why the Flyers don't have the personell to play that system, and how berube should adjust his system to better fit the players he has?

That's what I don't understand about player development. I understand that Akeson isn't a Top 6 player who gets 20 minutes a game. Totally fine with that, actually. But I don't understand how Akeson's path is so different from Rinaldo's that putting the player on a dysfunctional second unit is viewed as some type of mystical reward that has to be "earned," but Zac Rinaldo's is already earned because of what, exactly?

It's OK to develop BOTH players, with their skillsets.
- AllInForFlyers

That's a good point. Maybe it's because Rinaldo's been in the league longer so he gets PK but since Akeson has only played a handful of games, he has more to do to play on the 2nd PP. I don't know. At some point, "earning" a place needs to be disregarded in favor of who is best suited for what.

WRONG akeson would not he playing agains the joke competition he gets against other 4th liners so he won't be completing the same passes
- 2Real

Soooo., when he played on Coots' line against very tough competition in the playoffs last season, and made scoring plays, and led the TEAM in possession stats, what did that tell you?

Soooo., when he played on Coots' line against very tough competition in the playoffs last season, and made scoring plays, and led the TEAM in possession stats, what did that tell you?
- exlund

he got lucky
he has 0 points this year 0 what does that tell you

he got lucky
he has 0 points this year 0 what does that tell you
- 2Real

Bust.

Every system is pretty simple. First of all, success rate of carry ins versus dump ins has nothing to do with systems.
You gave a good description. Berube's forecheck scheme is a Center lock forecheck, is which the first two forwards, normally the wingers, go hard on the puck on the forecheck, while the center or the forward assuming the center position, locks on the weak side to protect against reverses and breakouts. It's a read and react between the forward and the defenseman on pinching or not. If the defenseman pinches, then the center backs him up.

Now explain to me why the Flyers don't have the personell to play that system, and how berube should adjust his system to better fit the players he has?
- MJL

Im not going to get into a day long debate with you cause life is just too short.

That's a good point. Maybe it's because Rinaldo's been in the league longer so he gets PK but since Akeson has only played a handful of games, he has more to do to play on the 2nd PP. I don't know. At some point, "earning" a place needs to be disregarded in favor of who is best suited for what.
- NickTheKid87

That's how I feel. I'm fine with Akeson on the fourth line. I think he's done just fine there, as a rookie.

But the 2nd PP unit has been a black hole for years now. Nobody seems to be able to do anything on it. I don't know that giving him a chance would break anything.

That was a great post, wasn't it?

I don't understand player development, much of the time. I question things that coaches do, and since they are paid to do what they do and lose their jobs if they don't do it well enough, you have to hope they know what they're doing, at some level.

But sometimes, you do have to wonder. Zac Rinaldo has champions on the coaching staff, and because he clearly works hard on the ice, he gets opportunities. That's fine. That's how it's supposed to work. Rinaldo gets time on the PK in games.

But Jason Akeson's worked hard, too, going from undrafted player to a stint in the ECHL, to surviving and improving under a structured coach like Terry Murray, to finally getting a roster spot on the Flyers. He paid his dues in the minors, which is also how it's supposed to work.

So to me, isn't it a fair question to ask that if Rinaldo's skillset lends to work on the PK, and he's requested to be on it and has a champion or two in the organization, and his hard work is being rewarded with some shifts, what doesn't Jason Akeson do to be given the same opportunity on the second PP unit, which hasn't done much of anything for years now?

That's what I don't understand about player development. I understand that Akeson isn't a Top 6 player who gets 20 minutes a game. Totally fine with that, actually. But I don't understand how Akeson's path is so different from Rinaldo's that putting the player on a dysfunctional second unit is viewed as some type of mystical reward that has to be "earned," but Zac Rinaldo's is already earned because of what, exactly?

It's OK to develop BOTH players, with their skillsets.
- AllInForFlyers

The strange thing is that Akeson was given opportunities before, but that spigot got shut off the second the puck dropped on the season. He played really well in the last couple of preseason games, too, creating a ton of chances... doesn't make much sense at all.

That's how I feel. I'm fine with Akeson on the fourth line. I think he's done just fine there, as a rookie.

But the 2nd PP unit has been a black hole for years now. Nobody seems to be able to do anything on it. I don't know that giving him a chance would break anything.
- AllInForFlyers

Sure couldn't hurt

Since we were talking about Iron Mike before, a really fantastic piece about Keenan's first year in Russia from Grantland:
http://grantland.com/feat...s/mike-keenan-russia-khl/

(this was written right before Metallurg won the championship.)

he got lucky
he has 0 points this year 0 what does that tell you
- 2Real

Akeson was second only to Giroux in PTS per 60 mins during the Rangers series last season (a small sample size, but still about twice what we have so far this season, where he's playing less minutes with less skilled mates). What does that tell you?

Akeson, not unlike G, is a playmaker/passer first and foremost. Rinaldo has been having more than twice as many shots per game this season vs. last season. What does that tell you?