That's what I'm proposing/saying: Let's not get so caught up with what a player might do that we lose the context of what they've done or are doing.

I understand what JSaq is saying, about focusing on tomorrow, not yesterday. I believe that.

But at the same time, you can't just forget yesterday. You have to understand failure in order to learn from it and grow.

How many coaches you have gone through does matter, for example. What are your processes for hiring? Are your players coachable and adaptable, or could some only succeed with certain coaches and not others? Are they being hindered by too many different systems? What is your organizational philosophy?

So on and so forth.

When I look at the Flyers right now, I see the obvious potential. I also see the various failures.

What I don't know is how well the potential meshes with the failures, and ultimately, if the players who have contributed to some of the failures have or are capable of learning enough from those failures to become contenders and champions.

Time will tell, but sometimes, players don't make the leap, sometimes potential goes begging. I'm just saying just because a guy is here and has potential doesn't mean he is an answer.
- AllInForFlyers

Well, the reason I saw that the past doesn't matter is, because hopefully, in Hextall, the Flyers have a GM who will take the good from the existing Flyers structure and the good from what teams like LA have done and avoid the pratfalls that currently have the Flyers in the hunt for a lottery pick, rather than a playoff berth

That's intriguing. It's bold and daring, too
- Jsaquella

Recchi was what, 26, and coming off consecutive 100+ pt seasons? Rico and LeClair were both a bit younger at 25?

Recchi was what, 26, and coming off consecutive 100+ pt seasons? Rico and LeClair were 25?
- Tomahawk

Yeah, Dionne was 24.

If Hextall does that, he needs to hit a home run. He can't afford to deal Voracek or Giroux and not get massive value.

Would you be willing to move G or Jake in a Recchi <-> Rico/LeClair type of move?
- Tomahawk

sure

who would be in the current roles of Desjardin and Leclair ?

The skate cut on MDZ is pretty gross.

http://www.broadstreethoc...hy-did-you-take-a-picture

Recchi was what, 26, and coming off consecutive 100+ pt seasons? Rico and LeClair were both a bit younger at 25?
- Tomahawk

I personally wouldn't make a deal like that..
Their was nothing to say that LeClair was going to turn out the way he did and Im not willing to trade a proven superstar or Jake , who looks to be coming into his own, for that.

With multiple defensive prospects on the horizon I just dont see a need to make that deal.

If you could package some combination of Read, Couturier, Simmonds, B Schenn, anyone else to get a Rico\10 deal I would do it.

The skate cut on MDZ is pretty gross.

http://www.broadstreethoc...hy-did-you-take-a-picture
- Jsaquella

DAMN...didnt realize it was that severe..MDZ is really lucky that didnt turn into a disaster.

DAMN...didnt realize it was that severe..MDZ is really lucky that didnt turn into a disaster.
- opeth_pa

Yeah, that's really bad looking.

sure

who would be in the current roles of Desjardin and Leclair ?
- Marc D

If I am moving Giroux or Voracek I'm getting a Subban or Weber back or OEL\Ekblad +
Yandle + a winger doesnt do it.

Yeah, that's really bad looking.
- Jsaquella

It really is..that first shot before the stitches it really is amazing that wasnt a horrible scene.

Well, the reason I saw that the past doesn't matter is, because hopefully, in Hextall, the Flyers have a GM who will take the good from the existing Flyers structure and the good from what teams like LA have done and avoid the pratfalls that currently have the Flyers in the hunt for a lottery pick, rather than a playoff berth
- Jsaquella

I hope so, too -- you know, it's funny.

I look at the Eagles, and how they handled DeSean Jackson. Obviously, a very good player, but a player they got rid of -- for whatever reason -- for absolutely nothing. And some people were howling and many were baffled by the move.

They were 10-6 with Jackson. They were 10-6 without Jackson. The Redskins were brutal without Jackson and with Jackson.

That's really my point about being wary of overvaluing individual players, or a roster -- a lot of times, a lot more players are a lot more replaceable than people think.

That's what I'm proposing/saying: Let's not get so caught up with what a player might do that we lose the context of what they've done or are doing.

I understand what JSaq is saying, about focusing on tomorrow, not yesterday. I believe that.

But at the same time, you can't just forget yesterday. You have to understand failure in order to learn from it and grow.

How many coaches you have gone through does matter, for example. What are your processes for hiring? Are your players coachable and adaptable, or could some only succeed with certain coaches and not others? Are they being hindered by too many different systems? What is your organizational philosophy?

So on and so forth.

When I look at the Flyers right now, I see the obvious potential. I also see the various failures.

What I don't know is how well the potential meshes with the failures, and ultimately, if the players who have contributed to some of the failures have or are capable of learning enough from those failures to become contenders and champions.

Time will tell, but sometimes, players don't make the leap, sometimes potential goes begging. I'm just saying just because a guy is here and has potential doesn't mean he is an answer.
- AllInForFlyers

I think they are in a transition now with Hexy, and trying to define some of the big questions you ask.

What type of team they want to be, and who is the best coach for that, and which players help get them there.

They have gone through some pretty big changes with Homer>Hexy and Lavi leaving.

A big frustration for me is what style and role do they want to play?

You know with some of the teams like LA and Anaheim what they want to do and they are pretty good at doing it.

The Flyers I am not sure.

The skate cut on MDZ is pretty gross.

http://www.broadstreethoc...hy-did-you-take-a-picture
- Jsaquella

some very large blood vessels in that neighborhood, yikes

some very large blood vessels in that neighborhood, yikes
- Marc D

This

Bill Meltzer: Meltzer's Musings: Flyers-Avs Wrap, WJC, Phantoms, Alumni and More
- bmeltzer

RJ Umburger has gotten much better in most recent games but something that bothers me a little is the second unit of the Power Play. I feel like we're throwing a group of leftovers on the ice. I personally feel Raffl should be seeing that net presence role over Umberger. I know it's a tricky thing looking for balance on the second unit due to the fact that Del Zotto comes in and out of the line up and he's gotta see PP time. Couturier seems to has gone in a lot of different places since getting PP time. He's played the left point/left half wall, net presence, right half wall roles. I'd also like to get him stable into a steady PP role. Couturier is also an underrated playmaker/passer on this team.

I hope so, too -- you know, it's funny.

I look at the Eagles, and how they handled DeSean Jackson. Obviously, a very good player, but a player they got rid of -- for whatever reason -- for absolutely nothing. And some people were howling and many were baffled by the move.

They were 10-6 with Jackson. They were 10-6 without Jackson. The Redskins were brutal without Jackson and with Jackson.

That's really my point about being wary of overvaluing individual players, or a roster -- a lot of times, a lot more players are a lot more replaceable than people think.
- AllInForFlyers

The Eagles didn't remove Jackson because they didn't value his skill level as a player. He was removed because they had questions about his character. There was a purpose to removing him. I have one question, how do we know that the Eagles wouldn't have had a better record this year and made the playoffs, if they kept Jackson and had him as a deep threat?
Just because the eagles had the same record this year as last year with Jackson, doesn't mean that he was replaceable. Lot's of factors go into why a team finishes where it does.

Eklund reporting both Nashville and Florida with interest in Vinny. Please god, let Eklund be right, just this once.




Please





Pretty, please.....

sure

who would be in the current roles of Desjardin and Leclair ?
- Marc D

Dunno... multiple 23-25 yo's who have (huge) untapped upsides?

Eklund reporting both Nashville and Florida with interest in Vinny. Please god, let Eklund be right, just this once.




Please





Pretty, please.....
- BiggE

I've made it no secret that I'm a Lecavalier supporter. I fully understand the direction we're going in but Lecavalier seems to be one of the very few players outside of our top two point getters who is making something happen, and with very limited line mates. Move him, get the cap space but it doesn't mean the move makes us better in any way, shape or form.

The Eagles didn't remove Jackson because they didn't value his skill level as a player. He was removed because they had questions about his character. There was a purpose to removing him. I have one question, how do we know that the Eagles wouldn't have had a better record this year and made the playoffs, if they kept Jackson and had him as a deep threat?
Just because the eagles had the same record this year as last year with Jackson, doesn't mean that he was replaceable. Lot's of factors go into why a team finishes where it does.
- MJL

How do we know the Flyers wouldn't have a better record with Jeff Carter and Mike Richards? We don't.

How do you know the Flyers won't have a better record without Nicklas Grossmann or Braydon Coburn? We don't.

But yeah, the fact that the Eagles finished with exactly the same record as they did without DeSean Jackson means that yes, he was replaceable.

Because, as you so correctly noted, lots of factors go into why a team finishes where it does -- and the lack of a particular player isn't always an overriding one.

Which was exactly my point.

How do we know the Flyers wouldn't have a better record with Jeff Carter and Mike Richards? We don't.

How do you know the Flyers won't have a better record without Nicklas Grossmann or Braydon Coburn? We don't.

But yeah, the fact that the Eagles finished with exactly the same record as they did without DeSean Jackson means that yes, he was replaceable.

Because, as you so correctly noted, lots of factors go into why a team finishes where it does -- and the lack of a particular player isn't always an overriding one.
- AllInForFlyers

Hey I mean everyone knows no one under age 21 drinks. No one. Ever.
- Giroux_Is_God

i seem to recall you declining a parking lot beer in the not so distant past...

I hope so, too -- you know, it's funny.

I look at the Eagles, and how they handled DeSean Jackson. Obviously, a very good player, but a player they got rid of -- for whatever reason -- for absolutely nothing. And some people were howling and many were baffled by the move.

They were 10-6 with Jackson. They were 10-6 without Jackson. The Redskins were brutal without Jackson and with Jackson.

That's really my point about being wary of overvaluing individual players, or a roster -- a lot of times, a lot more players are a lot more replaceable than people think.
- AllInForFlyers

There's definitely cases where you can have addition by subtraction. in the case of the Flyers, the bigger issue is not having the cap flexibility to fill the holes.

I mean, you could trade Claude Giroux right now and likely get a king's ransom. But you're also opening a huge hole, that is potentially harder to fll.

k seem to recall you declining a parking lot beer in the not so distant past...
- -davies-

Happy New Year!

The skate cut on MDZ is pretty gross.

http://www.broadstreethoc...hy-did-you-take-a-picture
- Jsaquella

wowee