You have not offered a single fact to support your opinion. You never do. Vancouver has a better roster than the Flyers. The Flyers have a game in hand and are 8 points ahead of Vancouver. Canucks biggest issue is goaltending. They have poor goaltending due to the injury to Thatcher Demko, their main goalie who has only played 15 games this year. That's why they're where they are in the standings. Vancouver has underachieved for that reason.

So now tell me how the Vancouver situation points out that the Flyers have overachieved. Give me one fact. Prove me wrong. Here is your chance.
- MJL

But what happened to posting the NHL standings , that was your reasoning behind saying the Flyers aren’t a bottom 5 roster 😂. The contradictory spin zone is reaching new levels. So now you are admitting that a team, regardless of standings can under or over achieve.

But what happened to posting the NHL standings , that was your reasoning behind saying the Flyers aren’t a bottom 5 roster 😂. The contradictory spin zone is reaching new levels. So now you are admitting that a team, regardless of standings can under or over achieve.
- ClaudeFather

Posting the standings was my proof that the Flyers are what they are which is not a bottom 5 team. It supports my opinion that the Flyers are not a bottom 5 team factually. Where is the contradiction? Where did I say that a team can't under or over achieve? What I did was provide some facts and show you why the Canucks are where they are in the standings. You then go on the other thread and try to poll the group on who has the better roster. As if that was ever in dispute.

I'm still waiting for you to provide some facts to support your opinion. I know you're used to dealing with others such as SSB who you try to bully. You don't ever support your opinions. Time to step to the plate. Or you can keep making ridiculous comments about spin. Your credibility is on the line, what little there is.

Posting the standings was my proof that the Flyers are what they are which is not a bottom 5 team. It supports my opinion that the Flyers are not a bottom 5 team factually. Where is the contradiction? Where did I say that a team can't under or over achieve? What I did was provide some facts and show you why the Canucks are where they are in the standings. You then go on the other thread and try to poll the group on who has the better roster. As if that was ever in dispute.

I'm still waiting for you to provide some facts to support your opinion. I know you're used to dealing with others such as SSB who you try to bully. You don't ever support your opinions. Time to step to the plate. Or you can keep making ridiculous comments about spin. Your credibility is on the line, what little there is.
- MJL

So the Canucks, have under achieved and have a roster that is better than a bottom 5 team 🧐. Maybe could the Flyers have over achieved because of good goaltending early on and a tighter structure that keeps games closer? They clearly have a worse roster than last season but are doing better

So the Canucks, have under achieved and have a roster that is better than a bottom 5 team 🧐. Maybe could the Flyers have over achieved because of good goaltending early on and a tighter structure that keeps games closer? They clearly have a worse roster than last season but are doing better
- ClaudeFather

I posted why the Canucks have struggled. I don't want to hear maybe's. The Flyers have not overachieved in my opinion. There has been no miracle coaching performance. The Flyers have lost 35 of 57 games. They have a .474 winning percentage. They've improved slightly from some improved play from some youngsters and better coaching. Last year they underachieved due to some really poor coaching finishing in the bottom 5.

I posted why the Canucks have struggled. I don't want to hear maybe's. The Flyers have not overachieved in my opinion. There has been no miracle coaching performance. The Flyers have lost 35 of 57 games. They have a .474 winning percentage. They've improved slightly from some improved play from some youngsters and better coaching. Last year they underachieved due to some really poor coaching finishing in the bottom 5.
- MJL

You posted nothing different than I, referencing goaltending and coaches so nice try. If not for the absolute atrocious OT record the Flyers would actually be 3-4 spots better than they are. The Flyers have 100% over achieved, it’s clear to everyone on here but you

You posted nothing different than I, referencing goaltending and coaches so nice try. If not for the absolute atrocious OT record the Flyers would actually be 3-4 spots better than they are. The Flyers have 100% over achieved, it’s clear to everyone on here but you
- ClaudeFather

If not for not scoring enough goals or letting in too many goals they Flyers would be a lot better than they are. If they had scored more goals they wouldn't have gotten to OT. Is that the best you've got?

Fallacies like it's clear to everyone are not going to help you. That just shows the weakness of your position. Like I said, when challenged, you fail miserably. You failed miserably trying to use the Canucks

The Flyers have not overachieved. Their roster adds up to where they should be. Not bad enough to be the bottom 5 and not good enough to push for a playoff spot. Although if they keep playing the way they are lately, they may get to the bottom 5.

You still have not offered a single fact to support your opinion.

If not for not scoring enough goals or letting in too many goals they Flyers would be a lot better than they are. If they had scored more goals they wouldn't have gotten to OT. Is that the best you've got?

Fallacies like it's clear to everyone are not going to help you. That just shows the weakness of your position. Like I said, when challenged, you fail miserably. You failed miserably trying to use the Canucks

The Flyers have not overachieved. Their roster adds up to where they should be. Not bad enough to be the bottom 5 and not good enough to push for a playoff spot. Although if they keep playing the way they are lately, they may get to the bottom 5.

You still have not offered a single fact to support your opinion.
- MJL

3 on 3 is vastly different than scoring more goals on 5 on 5. I’ve told you exactly why the flyers have over achieved in a more structured game and solid goaltending early on. You have done nothing to disprove this and you’ve contradicted yourself countless times between yesterday and today. Post the NHL standings again 😂 good day to you sir. When you get pushed against a figurative wall all you can do is lean back on nonsense semantics and deflect while thinking you’ve explained something thoroughly. We all see through it. You’ve been had, again…

3 on 3 is vastly different than scoring more goals on 5 on 5. I’ve told you exactly why the flyers have over achieved in a more structured game and solid goaltending early on. You have done nothing to disprove this and you’ve contradicted yourself countless times between yesterday and today. Post the NHL standings again 😂 good day to you sir. When you get pushed against a figurative wall all you can do is lean back on nonsense semantics and deflect while thinking you’ve explained something thoroughly. We all see through it. You’ve been had, again…
- ClaudeFather

Carter Hart as a goaltender has not overachieved. His level of play based on his past is not unexpected. Somehow you believe that a team playing a structured game, which any NHL team has the ability to do, is overachieving. You fail to realize that improving over the horrible team play they showed in the two previous seasons is not overachieving. It's accomplishing the minimum goal! LOL If you want, we can look at the facts about all that and point out to you how the Flyers have only slightly improved.
This is a typical response from you. You make a random statement such as I have contradicted myself countless times but can't name a single time of how I did so. You don't back up your statements. Ever! You just hope you can bully someone and then fall back on fallacies such as everyone sees it. Not going to work. You've embarrassed yourself.

Carter Hart as a goaltender has not overachieved. His level of play based on his past is not unexpected. Somehow you believe that a team playing a structured game, which any NHL team has the ability to do, is overachieving. You fail to realize that improving over the horrible team play they showed in the two previous seasons is not overachieving. It's accomplishing the minimum goal! LOL If you want, we can look at the facts about all that and point out to you how the Flyers have only slightly improved.
This is a typical response from you. You make a random statement such as I have contradicted myself countless times but can't name a single time of how I did so. You don't back up your statements. Ever! You just hope you can bully someone and then fall back on fallacies such as everyone sees it. Not going to work. You've embarrassed yourself.
- MJL

In a response to a the Flyers having a bottom 5 roster, you responded with the NHL standings. Then you admit that the Canucks have a better roster than the Flyers, so how can that be? Didn’t you post the standings as your evidence? Do you see the contradiction

In a response to a the Flyers having a bottom 5 roster, you responded with the NHL standings. Then you admit that the Canucks have a better roster than the Flyers, so how can that be? Didn’t you post the standings as your evidence? Do you see the contradiction
- ClaudeFather

There is no contradiction. I posted at the bottom of page 3 of this thread why the Canucks have underachieved this year relative to their roster. You should review that to get your facts straight. You don't seem to understand that the circumstances of each team aren't the same. That's just basic stuff. The Flyers with their current roster are about where they should be. If not for the injuries to Couturier and Atkinson, they'd probably be a bit better. The Canucks would be better also if not for the injury to Demko. How you think there is a contradiction is mind boggling.

There is no contradiction. I posted at the bottom of page 3 of this thread why the Canucks have underachieved this year relative to their roster. You should review that to get your facts straight. You don't seem to understand that the circumstances of each team aren't the same. That's just basic stuff. The Flyers with their current roster are about where they should be. If not for the injuries to Couturier and Atkinson, they'd probably be a bit better. The Canucks would be better also if not for the injury to Demko. How you think there is a contradiction is mind boggling.
- MJL

You saying the flyers are exactly where they should be is an opinion. An opinion which many do not share. Torts is known for getting the most out of his teams, and over achieving, it’s the same thing here. A team the regularly deploys ND, Mac, Brown, TDA as a first line Dman, Risto, our depth down the middle, is a bottom 5 roster. This team is over achieving. Your semantics and opinion don’t change that

You saying the flyers are exactly where they should be is an opinion. An opinion which many do not share. Torts is known for getting the most out of his teams, and over achieving, it’s the same thing here. A team the regularly deploys ND, Mac, Brown, TDA as a first line Dman, Risto, our depth down the middle, is a bottom 5 roster. This team is over achieving. Your semantics and opinion don’t change that
- ClaudeFather

Just like your opinion that they have overachieved is an opinion. Again, using a fallacy of many do not share. Irrelevant. I'm not fooled by the propaganda and use the facts to form my opinion. It's not a bottom 5 roster. The teams actually in the bottom 5 have worse rosters. Again, you haven't backed anything up. Now moving from a contradiction to semantics. You haven't made an effective argument. Maybe you can go back to the other thread and call me out again. That worked really well for you.