The predators miraculously won that trade
- ClaudeFather

The Flyers probably get close to their money’s worth for two years if Ellis was healthy. Ifs ands and buts and all that.

The Flyers probably get close to their money’s worth for two years if Ellis was healthy. Ifs ands and buts and all that.
- Minnyhock

Same time it would have delayed the rebuild, so call it a win?

Same time it would have delayed the rebuild, so call it a win?
- ClaudeFather

Delay the rebuild but maybe some offset with Ellis mentoring and example.

why, you don't believe it, so it must not be true.
- Peter Richards

You stated that you knew Myers wasn’t any good during our last playoff run when…

A) Ghost couldn’t get a spot in the line up.
B) Niskanen’s play was night and day from what he established in the regular season.
C) Myers first ever playoff run taking a regular shift next to Sanheim on the second pair, where the Flyers managed to lose in the semi final, which included a seeding round.

If Myers was clearly bad in 2020, the coaching staff didn’t catch it.

They didn’t fool the Preds. They didn’t have expectations for him. It was a pure cap dump.
- Minnyhock

We know what Myers became. That’s not the argument.

We know what Myers became. That’s not the argument.
- SuperSchennBros

Half a season of hockey does not equate to someone being a good player forever

Half a season of hockey does not equate to someone being a good player forever
- ClaudeFather

Also not the argument.

Delay the rebuild but maybe some offset with Ellis mentoring and example.
- Minnyhock

Maybe but might have cost us Michkov!

Provorov met expectations, he was never going to be a true #1, he was very solid when paired with a capable partner. Frost and Alison both lost significant time due to injury. Laughton had certainly met expectations, I’d say he’s exceeded them. Goalies are not great examples. And no one expected JVR to be a perennial all star, he has met expectations too, has had a nice career
- ClaudeFather

What the f*** are you...just kidding. Just a friendly discussion.

Provorov - was certainly viewed by most as a future #1 dman as late as 19-20, to say otherwise is a bit revisionist. Regressed after and is now gone. Was the team's best player in the 2018 playoffs before the shoulder injury and looked like a future #1 stud. He'd still be here had he met expectations.

Frost/Allison - I'll give you this one for now, but both need to pull it together this season to avoid the "below expectations" label. In truth though, we have to give them more time because of BOTH the injury history as well as the rushed development.

Laughton - was once viewed as the long-term answer at 3C, with the potential to develop into a 2C. He's managed to carve out a successful career as a 3W, but that's below expectations.

JVR - again, a bit revisionist IMO as doesn't accurately reflect expectations from the draft through his first couple of NHL seasons. Put up points on some bad Leafs teams, but ultimately never developed into the true power forward that was expected as he just played too soft.

I get a kick out of defending either the Flyers development or scouting teams.

Both are dogpoop, but somehow after the last decade we choose to defend men who don’t deserve to be employed in a capacity?

They arent giving you lifetime jobs as well for kissing their ass, even if that’s the usual way into the Flyer family.
- FlyerFan3260

I don't see defending I see others just not 100% agreeing with your points.

No one is saying ( i dont think) their drafting and development can't be improved. You think development is more the issue, to me its the drafting.

We know what Myers became. That’s not the argument.
- SuperSchennBros

You said the Flyers couldn’t have known he was a bust until his final year. My point was everyone else knew he was a bust before the Flyers did.

Hextall271: You are such a perfect flyers fan.... HAHAHAHA

As usual I can't quote from the front page.

You said the Flyers couldn’t have known he was a bust until his final year. My point was everyone else knew he was a bust before the Flyers did.
- Minnyhock

Who? Definitely not fans on this message board

Who? Definitely not fans on this message board
- SuperSchennBros

GMs and hockey people that get paid to see those things.

"On a good team" means there's more surrounding talent, more scoring chances and more production to go with it. And for Hart, it means better defensive play in front of him, fewer backdoor goals and deflection opportunities and more goal support. Couturier has met expectations for the vast majority of his career relative to how he was actually used. In the early years, he wasn't utilized in ways conducive to a lot of offensive production.
- bmeltzer

"On a good team" also means that a better player is needed in that spot to make the team good. Frost/Farabee would not be top 6 players today on most playoff teams.

Hart - is the NYR defense good? Shesterkin gets hung out to dry, too. Career .924 save %. Hart was once viewed as being at about the same talent level - Hart, Shesterkin, Sorokin, Blackwood, Samsonov were going to be quite the battle. We've only seen it in spurts from Hart, regardless of the D in front of him. He's been good, but below expectations after his absolutely dominant junior career.

Couturier - chicken or the egg. Was he used that way simply because of the coach or because he wasn't far enough along in his development to deserve more? The true answer is a bit of both.

Honest question - do you truly believe there hasn't been an issue with the Flyers rushing prospects that has hindered their long-term development?

Hextall271: You are such a perfect flyers fan.... HAHAHAHA

As usual I can't quote from the front page.
- FlyersGrace

Haha thanks. I guess I am not looking froward to the 10 year rebuild with losing 80% of our games..

Doesn't seem all that long ago that we used to have expectations of making the playoffs and making a run..

GMs and hockey people that get paid to see those things.
- Minnyhock

Again. This is a hindsight argument, which is not what we’re currently discussing. I’ve already stated in detail above what the argument is.

regarding the draft

always pick BPA this is how you end up drafting Sam Bowie instead of Michael Jordan
now think about all the flyers mistakes over the years

"On a good team" also means that a better player is needed in that spot to make the team good. Frost/Farabee would not be top 6 players today on most playoff teams.

Hart - is the NYR defense good? Shesterkin gets hung out to dry, too. Career .924 save %. Hart was once viewed as being at about the same talent level - Hart, Shesterkin, Sorokin, Blackwood, Samsonov were going to be quite the battle. We've only seen it in spurts from Hart, regardless of the D in front of him. He's been good, but below expectations after his absolutely dominant junior career.

Couturier - chicken or the egg. Was he used that way simply because of the coach or because he wasn't far enough along in his development to deserve it? The true answer is a bit of both.
- Quetzalcoatl

Going to disagree. He was used that way because he was so good defensively by a huge margin and there was nobody else on the roster that could do what he did. He filled a huge hole in the roster and that became his purpose. Developing him beyond his defensive role was not a priority. So in my opinion it was coaching and roster construction.

https://theathletic.com/3...in-review-sean-couturier/

Now, Couturier’s breakout doesn’t seem so crazy. Had he simply stayed healthy, been given about an extra minute of 5-on-5 ice time per game, found a spot on a 3-on-3 group that worked, and gotten a role on PP1 in each of the two years prior to his huge 2017-18, we’re potentially talking about a 60-point player without requiring a true talent improvement. This is a perfect example of why usage and context matters when evaluating players. Of course, Couturier still had to produce in those minutes, but in order to even get to that point, a player must receive the minutes in the first place.

Which is why it drives me nuts when I hear all the time that young players need to "earn" their spots when they are never given the opportunity to excel or are forced to be a square peg in a round hole (hello Torts).

Sure there's a fine between throwing someone into the fire unprepared but there's also not giving players the opportunity to succeed and sometimes that means allowing them to learn from their mistakes. Unfortunately it is far more acceptable to bury someone and stunt their career than to take a chance on a player to allow him to make mistakes and/or possibly excel in a new situation.

Going to disagree. He was used that way because he was a good so good defensively by a huge margin and there was nobody else on the roster that could do what he did. He filled a huge hole in the roster and that became his purpose. Developing him beyond his defensive role was not a priority. So in my opinion it was coaching and roster construction.

https://theathletic.com/3...in-review-sean-couturier/

Now, Couturier’s breakout doesn’t seem so crazy. Had he simply stayed healthy, been given about an extra minute of 5-on-5 ice time per game, found a spot on a 3-on-3 group that worked, and gotten a role on PP1 in each of the two years prior to his huge 2017-18, we’re potentially talking about a 60-point player without requiring a true talent improvement. This is a perfect example of why usage and context matters when evaluating players. Of course, Couturier still had to produce in those minutes, but in order to even get to that point, a player must receive the minutes in the first place.

Which is why it drives me nuts when I hear all the time that young players need to "earn" their spots when they are never given the opportunity to excel or are forced to be a square peg in a round hole (hello Torts).

Sure there's a fine between throwing someone into the fire unprepared but there's also not giving players the opportunity to succeed and sometimes that means allowing them to learn from their mistakes. Unfortunately it is far more acceptable to bury someone and stunt their career than to take a chance on a player to allow him to make mistakes and/or possibly excel in a new situation.
- Flyers_01

Good post.

The problem though with simply reviewing stats instead of watching the games (The Athletic, not you) is that we DID see Couturier get some chances higher in the lineup at times due to injuries and poor play of the top lines and he just didn't do much with it. Now, did Hakstol sit on him at 3C/low PP usage maybe a season or so too long? Yes, probably.

What the f*** are you...just kidding. Just a friendly discussion.

Provorov - was certainly viewed by most as a future #1 dman as late as 19-20, to say otherwise is a bit revisionist. Regressed after and is now gone. Was the team's best player in the 2018 playoffs before the shoulder injury and looked like a future #1 stud. He'd still be here had he met expectations.

Frost/Allison - I'll give you this one for now, but both need to pull it together this season to avoid the "below expectations" label. In truth though, we have to give them more time because of BOTH the injury history as well as the rushed development.

Laughton - was once viewed as the long-term answer at 3C, with the potential to develop into a 2C. He's managed to carve out a successful career as a 3W, but that's below expectations.

JVR - again, a bit revisionist IMO as doesn't accurately reflect expectations from the draft through his first couple of NHL seasons. Put up points on some bad Leafs teams, but ultimately never developed into the true power forward that was expected as he just played too soft.
- Quetzalcoatl

Jvr more so carved out his niche in the league though, second overall pick comparison isn’t exactly fair. He’s had a real solid career. Provy I will admit had higher expectations at some time but I do think he’s met expectations overall. He’s had some really good years with a capable partner, and some bad ones with others, not to excuse him of poor play. It’s a lot to play on a bad team as the #1 for so long

Jvr more so carved out his niche in the league though, second overall pick comparison isn’t exactly fair. He’s had a real solid career. Provy I will admit had higher expectations at some time but I do think he’s met expectations overall. He’s had some really good years with a capable partner, and some bad ones with others, not to excuse him of poor play. It’s a lot to play on a bad team as the #1 for so long
- ClaudeFather

Fair enough.

Going to disagree. He was used that way because he was so good defensively by a huge margin and there was nobody else on the roster that could do what he did. He filled a huge hole in the roster and that became his purpose. Developing him beyond his defensive role was not a priority. So in my opinion it was coaching and roster construction.

https://theathletic.com/3...in-review-sean-couturier/

Now, Couturier’s breakout doesn’t seem so crazy. Had he simply stayed healthy, been given about an extra minute of 5-on-5 ice time per game, found a spot on a 3-on-3 group that worked, and gotten a role on PP1 in each of the two years prior to his huge 2017-18, we’re potentially talking about a 60-point player without requiring a true talent improvement. This is a perfect example of why usage and context matters when evaluating players. Of course, Couturier still had to produce in those minutes, but in order to even get to that point, a player must receive the minutes in the first place.

Which is why it drives me nuts when I hear all the time that young players need to "earn" their spots when they are never given the opportunity to excel or are forced to be a square peg in a round hole (hello Torts).

Sure there's a fine between throwing someone into the fire unprepared but there's also not giving players the opportunity to succeed and sometimes that means allowing them to learn from their mistakes. Unfortunately it is far more acceptable to bury someone and stunt their career than to take a chance on a player to allow him to make mistakes and/or possibly excel in a new situation.
- Flyers_01

Im sad sometimes because there are some in the fanbase who dont realize how good Couturier has been (when he plays). Its not just the points, its how he drags everyone who plays with him up a substantial level in their games.

When you make everyone around you noticeably better, that is a big sign you are a great player. And Coots is a GREAT hockey player.

Part of me is nervous because if Coots plays like he is capable of playing this season, the Flyers WILL be better. He almost hurts them by being himself lol.

Flyers season - Under/over

30 Wins
Under
15 OTL
About right
225 Goals For
Under
275 Goals Against
Over
Finish #27 overall (bottom 5 NHL)
- cdearth23

Under, but close, they’ll be in the 28-30 range

People are underestimating how bad this D group is. There is no legit #1 nor a legit #2. Sanheim is a generic 2nd pairing guy, York is still a question mark and the rest are a combo of 3rd pairing players and borderline NHLers.

If they were to move Hart before Christmas, they could easily finish bottom 3, especially if any of their top 4-5 forwards miss any significant time.

Under, but close, they’ll be in the 28-30 range

People are underestimating how bad this D group is. There is no legit #1 nor a legit #2. Sanheim is a generic 2nd pairing guy, York is still a question mark and the rest are a combo of 3rd pairing players and borderline NHLers.

If they were to move Hart before Christmas, they could easily finish bottom 3, especially if any of their top 4-5 forwards miss any significant time.
- BiggE

any bedard level talent in the upcoming draft?