Nothing to do with perspective. Again, a simple fact.

You just have tunnel vision on a rational that you want to have. You're attitude if you will. The rational that I have used, could not as a whole be used for Hamilton.
- MJL

if you're going to insult people at least use proper grammar

So many things to carp about here. Grumble, grumble.

1. First, why not create your own style yourself which reduces dependence on a single player? You have to start sometime, right? There will always be a transition cost at that time, no?

2. Why is it ok for a rising cup with contending aspirations to risk not getting there, and not ok for a moribund, stagnant bubble team to risk being a lottery team?

3. How did that "non-lottery" pretensions looking now with Couts? Do you realize he is heading for 45-46 point season which, btw, happens to be exactly whereabouts Hayes would have projected?
- PT21

Couturier's current point production is not the norm. Creating that style takes better players.

Nothing to do with perspective. Again, a simple fact.

You just have tunnel vision on a rational that you want to have. You're attitude if you will. The rational that I have used, could not as a whole be used for Hamilton.
- MJL

I dunno what facts you are referring to. I am talking about the mentoring part. Why does the Canes core not need this mentoring froma star mature payer that Couturier provides? We too have plenty of older players. Just not at that level.

if you're going to insult people at least use proper grammar
- 2Real

I don't feel insulted but ...MJL, since this guy went there: it's rationale.

I dunno what facts you are referring to. I am talking about the mentoring part. Why does the Canes core not need this mentoring froma star mature payer that Couturier provides? We too have plenty of older players. Just not at that level.
- PT21

Follow the conversation. The simple fact is that the Flyers don't have a replacement for Couturier. You called that an attitude.

How is that you can't grasp that the Canes have 12 players on their roster that are 27 years or older? That is half of an NHL roster.

Couturier's current point production is not the norm. Creating that style takes better players.
- MJL

And a coaching staff with a clue.

And a coaching staff with a clue.
- Tomahawk

Okay, someone enlighten me. What is with the sad brown paper bag revolution on Flyers Twitter verse?

2. Why is it ok for a rising cup with contending aspirations to risk not getting there, and not ok for a moribund, stagnant bubble team to risk being a lottery team?
- PT21

If they really felt like losing Dougie would hurt their chances, they would have kept him, no?

But this is the part where having a strong data dept and good analysts comes into play. I'm sure they considered who they had, who was likely to be available, ran the #s thru their models and came to the conclusion that losing Dougie wasn't likely to be a game changer for them.

I don't feel insulted but ...MJL, since this guy went there: it's rationale.

- PT21

hey mr. know it all clearly doesn't

Follow the conversation. The simple fact is that the Flyers don't have a replacement for Couturier. You called that an attitude.

How is that you can't grasp that the Canes have 12 players on their roster that are 27 years or older? That is half of an NHL roster.
- MJL

Hmm.

I am contesting the fact that "we don't have a replacement for Couturier."

The contesting is on 3 grounds:

1. The level we will stay at with Couts showed absolutely no indication it had to be so zealously preserved. In fact, there is a lot of evidence it would benefit from being upset. We have gone through this before.

2. The mentoship aspect of Couts' experience could be replaced with less costly players, of which we have just as many as Canes did.

3. Another team faced the same choices in 1, and went the exact opposite way.

So, you see, that simple fact of yours? Its a simple non-fact.

Wow ! Going on 10 hours of in fighting and whining.

If they really felt like losing Dougie would hurt their chances, they would have kept him, no?

But this is the part where having a strong data dept and good analysts comes into play. I'm sure they considered who they had, who was likely to be available, ran the #s thru their models and came to the conclusion that losing Dougie wasn't likely to be a game changer for them.
- Tomahawk

I believe it to be more of a future cap issue than strictly a player analytic issue.

Hmm.

I am contesting the fact that "we don't have a replacement for Couturier."

The contesting is on 3 grounds:

1. The level we will stay at with Couts showed absolutely no indication it had to be so zealously preserved. In fact, there is a lot of evidence it would benefit from being upset. We have gone through this before.

2. The mentoship aspect of Couts' experience could be replaced with less costly players, of which we have just as many as Canes did.

3. Another team faced the same choices in 1, and went the exact opposite way.

So, you see, that simple fact of yours? Its a simple non-fact.
- PT21

Here is a simple fact for you. You epically failed to contest that the Flyers have another player that can replace Couturier as a #1 all situations center. You actually have embarrassed yourself here. What does what another team did, have to do with if the Flyers have a replacement for Couturier?


Now if you want to argue that they shouldn't be concerned that they don't. That is a different discussion.

I believe it to be more of a future cap issue than strictly a player analytic issue.
- MJL

Yes, keeping Dougie may have forced their hand elsewhere.

If the #'s suggested they may be able to replace him by committee, then they're actually better off at the end of the day because it frees up resources to take care of Necas, Trocheck, etc.

Hmm.

I am contesting the fact that "we don't have a replacement for Couturier."

The contesting is on 3 grounds:

1. The level we will stay at with Couts showed absolutely no indication it had to be so zealously preserved. In fact, there is a lot of evidence it would benefit from being upset. We have gone through this before.

2. The mentoship aspect of Couts' experience could be replaced with less costly players, of which we have just as many as Canes did.

3. Another team faced the same choices in 1, and went the exact opposite way.

So, you see, that simple fact of yours? Its a simple non-fact.
- PT21

I haven’t been following along on your conversation so forgive the intrusion. Are you trying to get the Flyers to trade Couturier now that he has been re-signed? He is having a terrible year. Or are you just griping about the decision to keep him? Nothing can come from the latter.

Lost in all this mess is that Dave Hakstol actually squeezed some decent hockey teams out of this pile. He did a pretty solid job, outside of his fixation with Chris Vandevelde.
- StepfordSam

Here is a simple fact for you. You epically failed to contest that the Flyers have another player that can replace Couturier as a #1 all situations center. You actually have embarrassed yourself here. What does what another team did, have to do with if the Flyers have a replacement for Couturier?


Now if you want to argue that they shouldn't be concerned that they don't. That is a different discussion.
- MJL

I have already said 3 times that the in-house/FA replacement levels for Couts were no less viable than what Canes had for Dougie.

I accept Tomahawk's different argument that the style of the team was much less player dependent for the Canes. I am not sure I think that mistake needs to be corrected by another one.

Bolded: a gentle warning alert for you:

I haven’t been following along on your conversation so forgive the intrusion. Are you trying to get the Flyers to trade Couturier now that he has been re-signed? He is having a terrible year. Or are you just griping about the decision to keep him? Nothing can come from the latter.
- NC Flyers Fan

Ha ha. Forgive the intrusion, says the man, while wading into the daily fracas. You are the best.

2nd bold: This.

I am using that decision as an exemplar of the sort of seemingly reactionary, risk-avoiding, profit preserving decision-making that plagues this franchise.

As for good, what good does any such discussion do over here?

I have already said 3 times that the in-house/FA replacement levels for Couts were no less viable than what Canes had for Dougie.

I accept Tomahawk's different argument that the style of the team was much less player dependent for the Canes. I am not sure I think that mistake needs to be corrected by another one.

Bolded: a gentle warning alert for you:


- PT21

You can't even understand a simple fact. The Flyers don't have a replacement for Couturier. Dispute that if you want to but you can't.

I don't need a warning from you. It was a nice conversation until your elitist condescension kicked in. That's what you resort to when you've been out maneuvered. Also your lack of awareness of what posting that makes you look like.

As of right now, the Flyers don't have a replacement for Couturier.
- MJL

Didn’t you say in past blobs that we have depth?

the flyers have a replacement for couturier his name is shane

Didn’t you say in past blobs that we have depth?
- Robert's Plant

Did you believe that I was saying that the Flyers have depth of #1 NHL centers?

the flyers have a replacement for couturier his name is shane
- 2Real

Alan Ladd?

If they really felt like losing Dougie would hurt their chances, they would have kept him, no?

But this is the part where having a strong data dept and good analysts comes into play. I'm sure they considered who they had, who was likely to be available, ran the #s thru their models and came to the conclusion that losing Dougie wasn't likely to be a game changer for them.
- Tomahawk

Using this language then, I suspect if you transplanted the same staff over to the Flyers, and they did the same analysis for Couturier, their recommendations would be the same (let him walk).

And based on the dataset so far, you have to admit they would have been correct.