Nothing to see here

I still would prefer a flip out to center ice 99 times out of 100.
- jmatchett383

I'm torn. I really am. Because I like the kind of skill that is required to execute it, but damn, that's a tough play if/when it winds up in your net.

Because, again, at some point it will, if you do it often enough.

(frank) Tampa

(frank) Tampa
- Crimsoninja

Concise

There isn't a single person on this board, I would bet, who doesn't understand what we saw.

That doesn't mean it wasn't without risk -- a portion of Babcock's quote says it all, to me: They’re coming hard with one, they’re taking the wall with two, and probably the other side with three, there’s a space that you can execute in front of your net. Obviously the problem is when you turn the puck over in front of your net sometimes it ends up in your net. But I’m a big believer in getting back and executing fast so you don’t have to play in D-zone coverage at all.

Which is exactly my point: It'll be interesting to see how much risk tolerance everyone has when it inevitably winds up in the back of the Flyers' net.

I said that when he did it. There's a significant downside to that play. Doesn't mean he can't try it, but I'll withhold praise that it's a new era in Flyers hockey until we see the reactions when he gets stripped of the puck.
- AllInForFlyers

All I know is that if anyone understands forechecking schemes, and what plays have to be made sometimes, wouldn't be suggesting that Gostisbehere might possibly be scratched because of, or that the coach would have a problem with that play.
If you're going to take away that kind of play from a player like Gostisbehere, then you're limiting his value and what he can contribute as a player.
How many times have you seen the Flyers spend a long shift hemmed in their own zone because they tried to outlet the puck to a covered winger on the wall, or reversed or rimmed the puck right into the other teams forecheck scheme? Leading to a zone keep and extended attack time for the opposition?
If there is a better, safer option, then you take it. You take what the defense gives you. If the defense or forecheck has taken away those safer options, then it's awesome that a player has the athletic ability to make a play. Which is what Gostisbehere did, and lead to a 3-2 transition offense the other way. Why would a Coach have an issue with a player making a play?
The best teams use the middle of the ice all the time. They execute plays, and make good passes. They skate and buy space and time to outlet the puck.
Look at Berube's forecheck scheme that he employs? What is it designed to do? It's designed to force defenseman, most of which at LH, to their backhand, and into the waiting center on the off side of the puck. Or a pinching defenseman. How do you beat it. There are a number of ways. Quick ups or over-over breakouts if it's done quickly enough. Or good skating defenseman making a play. We say we want more mobile defenseman who can move the puck, then when one does, we question it and wonder if the Coach approves of it or not. And yea sometimes a risky play can backfire. But you live with that. But you don't pull up on the reins of your thoroughbred. You let him run.
And that's why I don't think Berube has a problem with that play. Because that is the game. The NHL is a skating game.

I mean, I'm not saying he should get into the habit of doing that, but I'd like to think Ghost knew most of the safer options weren't really viable at that point
- mcefalu

That play shows me how good this kid is going to be.

We say we want more mobile defenseman who can move the puck, then when one does, we question it and wonder if the Coach approves of it or not.
- MJL

I'm not going to really argue here, but there's a difference between a mobile defenseman moving the puck and a guy skating the puck in front of his crease between 2 forecheckers. I'm glad it worked out, but I'd hope that's not a play he intends to make often. I'm all for him using his full bag of tricks to help the team, but I think it was a rather risky play. He could have skated to the side of the net and used his puck skills to flip it out to center and create a 50/50 puck.

Again, it's great that he has the skills to do that, but I'd also hope he uses a play like that as a last resort when his other options are nullified.

All I know is that if anyone understands forechecking schemes, and what plays have to be made sometimes, wouldn't be suggesting that Gostisbehere might possibly be scratched because of, or that the coach would have a problem with that play.
If you're going to take away that kind of play from a player like Gostisbehere, then you're limiting his value and what he can contribute as a player.
How many times have you seen the Flyers spend a long shift hemmed in their own zone because they tried to outlet the puck to a covered winger on the wall, or reversed or rimmed the puck right into the other teams forecheck scheme? Leading to a zone keep and extended attack time for the opposition?
If there is a better, safer option, then you take it. You take what the defense gives you. If the defense or forecheck has taken away those safer options, then it's awesome that a player has the athletic ability to make a play. Which is what Gostisbehere did, and lead to a 3-2 transition offense the other way. Why would a Coach have an issue with a player making a play?
The best teams use the middle of the ice all the time. They execute plays, and make good passes. They skate and buy space and time to outlet the puck.
Look at Berube's forecheck scheme that he employs? What is it designed to do? It's designed to force defenseman, most of which at LH, to their backhand, and into the waiting center on the off side of the puck. Or a pinching defenseman. How do you beat it. There are a number of ways. Quick ups or over-over breakouts if it's done quickly enough. Or good skating defenseman making a play. We say we want more mobile defenseman who can move the puck, then when one does, we question it and wonder if the Coach approves of it or not. And yea sometimes a risky play can backfire. But you live with that. But you don't pull up on the reins of your thoroughbred. You let him run.
And that's why I don't think Berube has a problem with that play. Because that is the game. The NHL is a skating game.
- MJL

We question the coach and his tolerance for it because he doesn't let all his thoroughbreds run -- how are you going to sit there and tell us that what Ghost did is great because he is using his athletic ability to make a play and you live with the mistakes, when in the same thread, you say that Jason Akeson's pass was a "low-percentage play" blah blah blah?

Akeson tried to make a play, using his athletic ability to make passes -- he's probably one of the best passers on the team! That's what Akeson's trying to do -- make a play!

I'm not going to really argue here, but there's a difference between a mobile defenseman moving the puck and a guy skating the puck in front of his crease between 2 forecheckers. I'm glad it worked out, but I'd hope that's not a play he intends to make often. I'm all for him using his full bag of tricks to help the team, but I think it was a rather risky play. He could have skated to the side of the net and used his puck skills to flip it out to center and create a 50/50 puck.

Again, it's great that he has the skills to do that, but I'd also hope he uses a play like that as a last resort when his other options are nullified.
- jmatchett383

To me, this is an extremely reasoned approach to what he did.

To me, this is an extremely reasoned approach to what he did.
- AllInForFlyers

There's no room for glad handing here. Don't make me read this. You disagree or you move on.

That's what the thumbs up emoticon is for.

I'm not going to really argue here, but there's a difference between a mobile defenseman moving the puck and a guy skating the puck in front of his crease between 2 forecheckers. I'm glad it worked out, but I'd hope that's not a play he intends to make often. I'm all for him using his full bag of tricks to help the team, but I think it was a rather risky play. He could have skated to the side of the net and used his puck skills to flip it out to center and create a 50/50 puck.

Again, it's great that he has the skills to do that, but I'd also hope he uses a play like that as a last resort when his other options are nullified.
- jmatchett383

I disagree. There isn't a difference. Today's top teams skate so well and forecheck so well, that plays like that are going to have to be made sometimes. Sure he could chip it high off the wall, and out to center ice, where the other team will get it on a regroup, and come right back in with it, or dump back in so another puck battle will ensue, and more time defending. But if that's all you want, then just have a bunch of Nick Grossmann's back there. No offense to Grossmann, because I like him as a player. But you'll constantly be on the losing end of the puck possession and shot differential battle. I'd rather have the 3-2 going the other way that resulted in the play.

As far as the last statement, I agree, if there are better, safer options on the play, then by all means use it. But otherwise, such as that situation, use your skills and ability that makes you special. And make a play. Good players make plays, and take risks.

On a lighter note in ECHL news:



http://geektyrant.com/new...tman-and-riddler-uniforms

There's no room for glad handing here. Don't make me read this. You disagree or you move on.

That's what the thumbs up emoticon is for.
- mayorofangrytown

LOL LOL LOL

We question the coach and his tolerance for it because he doesn't let all his thoroughbreds run -- how are you going to sit there and tell us that what Ghost did is great because he is using his athletic ability to make a play and you live with the mistakes, when in the same thread, you say that Jason Akeson's pass was a "low-percentage play" blah blah blah?

Akeson tried to make a play, using his athletic ability to make passes -- he's probably one of the best passers on the team! That's what Akeson's trying to do -- make a play!
- AllInForFlyers

It's a different play, because on a cross ice pass, you're giving the puck up for grabs. You're losing possession of the puck. Claude Giroux is the best passer on the club. Berube doesn't want him making cross ice passes across the defense. Why are cross ice passes so dangerous? Because that is what neutral zone checking and forechecking schemes are designed to do! They're designed to force you to make that cross ice pass, because they are waiting for it. That is the trap that they set. It's a completely different situation.

It's pretty simple. Good teams avoid making risky cross ice passes. Good puck moving defenseman have to make some risky plays on occasion to beat a forecheck. The middle of the ice is the opening to beat it. You're okay with a player with the skills or wheels that Gistisbehere has making that play. With Grossmann or Luke Schenn, not so much.

The author of that article has it 100% correct when he ends with this statement.

"This was no rookie mistake. It was a skilled, confident move by a creative player with a bright future in the NHL. "

About the "rivalry" Tampa fans feel towards the Flyers...

First, I have lived in Tampa since 1976, but was born and raised a St. Louis fan. I converted to the Lightning when they first came into the league and have watched or attended games since the get-go.

Here is why some Tampa fans hate the Flyers (I don't) :

1) The Lightning's very first trip the playoffs resulted in a disappointing quarterfinals loss to the Flyers. It was like a kid going to a new school for the first time, and then getting his arse whooped by the big burly kid on the playground.

2) The Legion of Doom. Lindros, LeClair and company abused the Lightning. We had no answer for that line and it rolled all over us. It was like we had a midget-league team trying to compete against the Lindros steamroller.

3) (this one is more recent) - a lot of fans blame Philly for the nationwide debacle of that infamous game that the world now looks upon as the worst and strangest match in modern NHL history. November 9, 2011. Yeah, it was our bug-eyed coach who insisted we play that passive trap and Laviolette insisted on not playing into that trap. We all know the result. It was bizarre. Neither side was really to blame - it was a staring contest gone wrong.

The first two reasons are ancient history and many young Lightning fans were in diapers when the Flyers pounded us out of the playoffs back in '96. Honestly, the younger fans really have no reason to hate the Flyers. In more recent times, the Lightning have given the Flyers a good run for their money. Philly used to own us, now the tables have turned somewhat.

The real rivalry in Tampa was against the Panthers - they used to have our number and whoop the daylights out of us almost every time we played. There was real hatred there between the fanbases. But, even that has faded. The Lightning have the upper-hand on the Swamp Cats now and there is not much of a rivalry any more. In fact, Lightning fans feel sorry for the Panthers because of their terrible location, poor attendance, and lack of success. I guess the Cats will be moving to Quebec or elsewhere in the future.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot - Pronger. When he was in a Flyers jersey, he abused us on a regular basis. Since he used to play for my old team (St. Louis), I always had a lot of respect for Pronger. It sucks how his career ended, but some Lighting fans still don't like him.

So that's it. Not much of a rivalry really. I like our games - they are always fun to watch, no matter who wins. I just hope this isn't another 10 or 12 goal mess - a nice 2-1 goalie duel would be better in my book. Don't get me wrong, I like a lot of goals, but too many is a sign of problems the teams need to fix.

Thomas Vanek was questioned in an investigation of a gambling ring in Rochester. Apparently Vanek was in the hole by a huge chunk of change, as part of the evidence was a $230k check from the Isles endorsed over to the ring by Vanek.

https://www.democratandch...-vanek-gambling/12992495/

Thomas Vanek was questioned in an investigation of a gambling ring in Rochester. Apparently Vanek was in the hole by a huge chunk of change, as part of the evidence was a $230k check from the Isles endorsed over to the ring by Vanek.

https://www.democratandch...-vanek-gambling/12992495/
- Jsaquella

Give that mon hiz money

Ghost needs to play. In the AHL or NHL. Playing him reduced minutes is bad enough.

Being scratched shouldn't ever fall into the gameplan. Not a fan.

Ghost needs to play. In the AHL or NHL. Playing him reduced minutes is bad enough.

Being scratched shouldn't ever fall into the gameplan. Not a fan.
- flyer_nutter

is the Tampa Bay Bandwagon hyped up for tonight?

Thinking of buying something like this for the ward. Hmm.

is the Tampa Bay Bandwagon hyped up for tonight?
- Crimsoninja

Not like these Flyers. Best team EVAAH.

There's no room for glad handing here. Don't make me read this. You disagree or you move on.

That's what the thumbs up emoticon is for.
- mayorofangrytown

Not like these Flyers. Best team EVAAH.
- flyer_nutter

#trashfire

#trashfire
- Crimsoninja

In Holmgren we trust?

Trick or treat.