It’s obviously speculation but at least for tk and hart I think they could be a lot better with better surroundings. Not exactly sure on the ceiling. Do you think hart would do ok in Edmonton for example? I think ina couple years he could put them over the top. Maybe they need one more dman.
- Hextall271

Maybe a little better, TK was a one man wrecking crew last year and he was awesome with Coots and G. He’s a first line winger, maybe he’d have more points just being on a better team, but I don’t think he would be much better. I think a change of scenery would help Hart, similar to Provy. Goalies a different animal though, this team has been an absolute wreck in front of him

Ok, agree to disagree. It WOULD have been a good trade had they won or even kept him for a few seasons.

But we can differ on what a good return should be. I feel like getting 34 games out of a player for Justin Williams is not a good return.
- MBFlyerfan

Can’t have it both ways, when you’re a team on the verge of winning and they do something to help at the expense of a young player it’s not giving up on the player. It’s a business decision.

Maybe a little better, TK was a one man wrecking crew last year and he was awesome with Coots and G. He’s a first line winger, maybe he’d have more points just being on a better team, but I don’t think he would be much better. I think a change of scenery would help Hart, similar to Provy. Goalies a different animal though, this team has been an absolute wreck in front of him
- ClaudeFather

I’m glad you added the last point. The absolute train wreck has a big impact on the tenders stats confidence and generally how he looks in the net. With a better team d that he can trust. I really think he has the goods to be a great one. I really like his technique and many many people I know say that he reminds them a lot of price. Very high praise. I’ll end with this, if we’re going to send him out, I really hope they get a lot. None of this, oh a low 3rd rounder or anything like that. I think other teams know that he’s a keeper and ar e trying to fleece the flyers.

Oh we’ve established this as fact. As they always do. Ulmark will probably score on Peterson when he’s in the net. That was a great pickup at 5 mil. Holy f.
- Hextall271

That defense. Woff!

Maybe a little better, TK was a one man wrecking crew last year and he was awesome with Coots and G. He’s a first line winger, maybe he’d have more points just being on a better team, but I don’t think he would be much better. I think a change of scenery would help Hart, similar to Provy. Goalies a different animal though, this team has been an absolute wreck in front of him
- ClaudeFather

I get what you are saying, but i think tk now is not what tk was 3-4 years ago. would like to see him with a younger G.

This one bothers me. As he constantly says "I dont know anything about him" when asked about prospects and younger players on the Phantoms.
- MBFlyerfan

Torts is a con man and there’s no bigger sucker out there than the Flyer’s mgmt.

Torts is lazy, arrogant and out of touch with how the game is played in 2023 at the NHL level. The sooner he’s gone, the better. Heck, if the Flyers had just one more healthy Dman in 2004, he doesn’t win that Cup and he’s probably sitting at home right now wondering why his horse keeps kicking him.

Ok, agree to disagree. It WOULD have been a good trade had they won or even kept him for a few seasons.

But we can differ on what a good return should be. I feel like getting 34 games out of a player for Justin Williams is not a good return.
- MBFlyerfan

has nothing to do with the original trade imo.

https://dailyhive.com/van...hile-coaching-the-canucks

3. Not practicing anything
Forget practicing shootouts, Torts had a problem with practice, period.

Gary Mason recounts:

“The players were unhappy about the amount of practice Tortorella was conducting. To put it a different way – players didn’t think they were practicing enough and that Tortorella took practice seriously enough…

Tortorella has different views about a whole bunch of things, about practicing the power play.

One of the things he did that really struck people as odd – he didn’t look at videotape of the team he was going to be facing.

There are coaches we know that coached in Vancouver that didn’t believe in coaching the power play. Mike Keenan was one of them.”
- Flyers_01

I'm not the Torts Whisper but in the year-plus he has been here, he definitely has his own way of doing things. He may or may not agree -- these are just my own read, and it could be wrong -- but I can see a few parallels here with several things mentioned in the article. Except there's a method to it, not craziness.

"Doesn't practice the power play".... The Flyers do practice the power play under Torts but, in general, he's a big believer in delegating to his assistants. All goaltending issues filter through the goalie coach. Power play through the assistant who runs PP and PK through that assistant. But, in general, the head coach being fairly hands off in terms of the power play was an old school staple. Even Fred Shero, hockey's most innovative coach of his time, believed the power play didn't have to be practiced.

"Yelling at David Booth for being late when he wasn't." I strongly suspect that Torts knew Booth was on time BUT was looking for a confrontation before even heading into the room. A) He probably wanted to see how Booth would react and B) He wanted to see if other Canucks would push back on his behalf. He's always done that sort of thing. Even at last Saturday's second scrimmage, matching two sides in their third scrimmage in two days (after the Day 1 skate test), when Tortorella stopped it midway through to come down and berate the players on the ice, most observers thought the actual simulated game wasn't going THAT badly. Torts may have been looking for an "in" to send a message that he wasn't going to cut any slack no matter how much skating they'd done. Likewise, I doubt it was an accident that he had a lot players in Sunday's double-scrimmage group (their fourth in three days) in Monday's lineup in Newark. He knew they'd be the most dead-legged on Monday and wanted to see who'd overcome it and have a good game. As it turned out, practically no one did.

"Having stars block shots." Yes, that's a non-negotiable with Torts.

"Communicating with players." Although Torts says his favorite part of coaching is getting to know players, their families, etc., he doesn't really talk much one-on-one with players (although he does welcome them to come to his office if they feel they want to discuss something). I don't believe last year that he didn't know he was scratching Frost and Sanheim in front of their families -- that was too coincidental that the lone scratching for both just so happened be in their respective hometown/junior hockey city with their family and friends in the stands. But as Torts explains it and people like Atkinson and Scott Hartnell have said, the relationship is built over more than one year and one off-season. Sanheim this year should have a better relationship with Tortorella, at least in theory. Frost might. York might. We shall see.

"Communicating with anyone." We'll see over time with Jones, Briere, Lappy, etc., but so far they all say on or off the record that they have a strong relationship with Torts.In terms of communicating with the media, it all depends on Torts' mood and the situation. He can be relaxed, instructive, patient, articulate and even friendly. He can be blunt and brief. Or he can get downright surly and confrontational over seemingly routine stuff. There are usually a couple reporters with whom he's the most likely to curse at or cut off. He's usually good with the broadcasters. And in terms of writers, I know I've told the Jay Greenberg story before but I'll repeat it. When Jay was let go by the New York Daily News, the one and only coach he'd covered over his long career who called him on the phone just to ask how he was doing was John Tortorella.

I'll also take issue with the article saying that Tortorella's relationship with Travis Green, by virtue of not discussing what was going on with Utica, showed that he "didn't care". I've heard this first hand: Torts believes in giving the minor league HC the space to run his own team. He doesn't demand they mirror Torts' systems. He doesn't demand players' AHL roles be tailored the way Torts would use them in the NHL. And he doesn't impose he own reads on a player on them, but also isn't going to seek a lot of input the other way on callup players. He finds out the 411 from management and then makes his own calls. You can like it or dislike it, but I don't think "he doesn't care" is accurate.

"Not learning from his mistakes." I would say that's subjective. However, the things he considers non-negotiables don't change from team to team. In general, there is evidence that he's evolved in some ways, held firm in other ways.

"Not practicing the shootout." I'm not sure if there's direct evidence, one way or another, that practicing or not practicing the shootout makes a tangible difference on a team's shootout record. We all know the Flyers have the NHl's worst all-time shootout record. But they've mixed in practices during some regimes, and not done it with others. Leaguewide, I don't know how many coaches either work in to the regimen or do not.

"Not practicing anything." This is not accurate. Tortorella absolutely does watch prescout video, does watch and critique his own teams' game video (although the assistant coaches do the heavy lifting in what to select and review with players), and he does target specific areas for practice. Now, that being said, the Torts Flyers do heavily systems-focused work at a later point in training camp than I've seen with previous regimes in camp. He is big on the skating volume, conditioning grind, lots of battle drills and small-area stuff and the level of compete in scrimmages on the front end of camp, and systems work later on.

"Benching Luongo for the Heritage Classic." I can't speak to that particular situation. But, as per the Frost (in Toronto) and Sanheim (in Calgary) scratches last year, I do believe that, if he wants to send a message to a player, doing it in a game the player is especially psyched to play very well could be a deliberate calculation even if that motivation is denied publicly.

"Storming Calgary's dressing room." The previous items on this last might have been categorized as "crazy" by the headline, but I wouldn't call any of them actually crazy. The Calgary thing, though, yeah that nuts. Vancouver has been his only short coaching stint in the NHL. The rest have been rather long-lasting, especially for a coach with the rep for pushing hard. I do think he realizes the Calgary incident was over the line for any professional.

It’s obviously speculation but at least for tk and hart I think they could be a lot better with better surroundings. Not exactly sure on the ceiling. Do you think hart would do ok in Edmonton for example? I think ina couple years he could put them over the top. Maybe they need one more dman.
- Hextall271

I’m sure I’m alone on this gut feeling but I’m not really expecting a repeat from Konency’s last season performance. TK has had better support around him and didn’t always come through. Last season he’s doing more with less. Hopefully it wasn’t a fluke but I’m. Expecting the kids to outshine him this season.

no he was better than a decent 4. You make that trade every time when you were in the positon the flyers where at the time.

Does the timing of a trade change the value of trades? When teams know your in a bad spot does that change the value?

people crack me up.
- hello it's me 2050

Yes, Carolina fleeced the Flyers after Seidenberg, Rico and Ragnarsson went down. Clarke had been saying all year that he wouldn't trade JWill and Gags for older players.

Then the Flyers got basically market value for Markov after the lockout.

Can’t have it both ways, when you’re a team on the verge of winning and they do something to help at the expense of a young player it’s not giving up on the player. It’s a business decision.
- ClaudeFather

In some cases yes but overall in that situation, it was not. Many factors came into play with that deal. One was the Flyers overall philosophy of always going for it. Another was the injuries on defense. The other was that the Flyers gave up on Williams and were impatient. Just like they always were and still are until proven otherwise. If they valued Williams higher, they would've kept him.

I'm not the Torts Whisper but in the year-plus he has been here, he definitely has his own way of doing things. He may or may not agree -- these are just my own read, and it could be wrong -- but I can see a few parallels here with several things mentioned in the article. Except there's a method to it, not craziness.

"Doesn't practice the power play".... The Flyers do practice the power play under Torts but, in general, he's a big believer in delegating to his assistants. All goaltending issues filter through the goalie coach. Power play through the assistant who runs PP and PK through that assistant. But, in general, the head coach being fairly hands off in terms of the power play was an old school staple. Even Fred Shero, hockey's most innovative coach of his time, believed the power play didn't have to be practiced.

"Yelling at David Booth for being late when he wasn't." I strongly suspect that Torts knew Booth was on time BUT was looking for a confrontation before even heading into the room. A) He probably wanted to see how Booth would react and B) He wanted to see if other Canucks would push back on his behalf. He's always done that sort of thing. Even at last Saturday's second scrimmage, matching two sides in their third scrimmage in two days (after the Day 1 skate test), when Tortorella stopped it midway through to come down and berate the players on the ice, most observers thought the actual simulated game wasn't going THAT badly. Torts may have been looking for an "in" to send a message that he wasn't going to cut any slack no matter how much skating they'd done. Likewise, I doubt it was an accident that he had a lot players in Sunday's double-scrimmage group (their fourth in three days) in Monday's lineup in Newark. He knew they'd be the most dead-legged on Monday and wanted to see who'd overcome it and have a good game. As it turned out, practically no one did.

"Having stars block shots." Yes, that's a non-negotiable with Torts.

"Communicating with players." Although Torts says his favorite part of coaching is getting to know players, their families, etc., he doesn't really talk much one-on-one with players (although he does welcome them to come to his office if they feel they want to discuss something). I don't believe last year that he didn't know he was scratching Frost and Sanheim in front of their families -- that was too coincidental that the lone scratching for both just so happened be in their respective hometown/junior hockey city with their family and friends in the stands. But as Torts explains it and people like Atkinson and Scott Hartnell have said, the relationship is built over more than one year and one off-season. Sanheim this year should have a better relationship with Tortorella, at least in theory. Frost might. York might. We shall see.

"Communicating with anyone." We'll see over time with Jones, Briere, Lappy, etc., but so far they all say on or off the record that they have a strong relationship with Torts.In terms of communicating with the media, it all depends on Torts' mood and the situation. He can be relaxed, instructive, patient, articulate and even friendly. He can be blunt and brief. Or he can get downright surly and confrontational over seemingly routine stuff. There are usually a couple reporters with whom he's the most likely to curse at or cut off. He's usually good with the broadcasters. And in terms of writers, I know I've told the Jay Greenberg story before but I'll repeat it. When Jay was let go by the New York Daily News, the one and only coach he'd covered over his long career who called him on the phone just to ask how he was doing was John Tortorella.

I'll also take issue with the article saying that Tortorella's relationship with Travis Green, by virtue of not discussing what was going on with Utica, showed that he "didn't care". I've heard this first hand: Torts believes in giving the minor league HC the space to run his own team. He doesn't demand they mirror Torts' systems. He doesn't demand players' AHL roles be tailored the way Torts would use them in the NHL. And he doesn't impose he own reads on a player on them, but also isn't going to seek a lot of input the other way on callup players. He finds out the 411 from management and then makes his own calls. You can like it or dislike it, but I don't think "he doesn't care" is accurate.

"Not learning from his mistakes." I would say that's subjective. However, the things he considers non-negotiables don't change from team to team. In general, there is evidence that he's evolved in some ways, held firm in other ways.

"Not practicing the shootout." I'm not sure if there's direct evidence, one way or another, that practicing or not practicing the shootout makes a tangible difference on a team's shootout record. We all know the Flyers have the NHl's worst all-time shootout record. But they've mixed in practices during some regimes, and not done it with others. Leaguewide, I don't know how many coaches either work in to the regimen or do not.

"Not practicing anything." This is not accurate. Tortorella absolutely does watch prescout video, does watch and critique his own teams' game video (although the assistant coaches do the heavy lifting in what to select and review with players), and he does target specific areas for practice. Now, that being said, the Torts Flyers do heavily systems-focused work at a later point in training camp than I've seen with previous regimes in camp. He is big on the skating volume, conditioning grind, lots of battle drills and small-area stuff and the level of compete in scrimmages on the front end of camp, and systems work later on.

"Benching Luongo for the Heritage Classic." I can't speak to that particular situation. But, as per the Frost (in Toronto) and Sanheim (in Calgary) scratches last year, I do believe that, if he wants to send a message to a player, doing it in a game the player is especially psyched to play very well could be a deliberate calculation even if that motivation is denied publicly.

"Storming Calgary's dressing room." The previous items on this last might have been categorized as "crazy" by the headline, but I wouldn't call any of them actually crazy. The Calgary thing, though, yeah that nuts. Vancouver has been his only short coaching stint in the NHL. The rest have been rather long-lasting, especially for a coach with the rep for pushing hard. I do think he realizes the Calgary incident was over the line for any professional.
- bmeltzer

Head games galore.

(for a self-proclaimed straight shooter)

I'm not the Torts Whisper but in the year-plus he has been here, he definitely has his own way of doing things. He may or may not agree -- these are just my own read, and it could be wrong -- but I can see a few parallels here with several things mentioned in the article. Except there's a method to it, not craziness.

"Doesn't practice the power play".... The Flyers do practice the power play under Torts but, in general, he's a big believer in delegating to his assistants. All goaltending issues filter through the goalie coach. Power play through the assistant who runs PP and PK through that assistant. But, in general, the head coach being fairly hands off in terms of the power play was an old school staple. Even Fred Shero, hockey's most innovative coach of his time, believed the power play didn't have to be practiced.

"Yelling at David Booth for being late when he wasn't." I strongly suspect that Torts knew Booth was on time BUT was looking for a confrontation before even heading into the room. A) He probably wanted to see how Booth would react and B) He wanted to see if other Canucks would push back on his behalf. He's always done that sort of thing. Even at last Saturday's second scrimmage, matching two sides in their third scrimmage in two days (after the Day 1 skate test), when Tortorella stopped it midway through to come down and berate the players on the ice, most observers thought the actual simulated game wasn't going THAT badly. Torts may have been looking for an "in" to send a message that he wasn't going to cut any slack no matter how much skating they'd done. Likewise, I doubt it was an accident that he had a lot players in Sunday's double-scrimmage group (their fourth in three days) in Monday's lineup in Newark. He knew they'd be the most dead-legged on Monday and wanted to see who'd overcome it and have a good game. As it turned out, practically no one did.

"Having stars block shots." Yes, that's a non-negotiable with Torts.

"Communicating with players." Although Torts says his favorite part of coaching is getting to know players, their families, etc., he doesn't really talk much one-on-one with players (although he does welcome them to come to his office if they feel they want to discuss something). I don't believe last year that he didn't know he was scratching Frost and Sanheim in front of their families -- that was too coincidental that the lone scratching for both just so happened be in their respective hometown/junior hockey city with their family and friends in the stands. But as Torts explains it and people like Atkinson and Scott Hartnell have said, the relationship is built over more than one year and one off-season. Sanheim this year should have a better relationship with Tortorella, at least in theory. Frost might. York might. We shall see.

"Communicating with anyone." We'll see over time with Jones, Briere, Lappy, etc., but so far they all say on or off the record that they have a strong relationship with Torts.In terms of communicating with the media, it all depends on Torts' mood and the situation. He can be relaxed, instructive, patient, articulate and even friendly. He can be blunt and brief. Or he can get downright surly and confrontational over seemingly routine stuff. There are usually a couple reporters with whom he's the most likely to curse at or cut off. He's usually good with the broadcasters. And in terms of writers, I know I've told the Jay Greenberg story before but I'll repeat it. When Jay was let go by the New York Daily News, the one and only coach he'd covered over his long career who called him on the phone just to ask how he was doing was John Tortorella.

I'll also take issue with the article saying that Tortorella's relationship with Travis Green, by virtue of not discussing what was going on with Utica, showed that he "didn't care". I've heard this first hand: Torts believes in giving the minor league HC the space to run his own team. He doesn't demand they mirror Torts' systems. He doesn't demand players' AHL roles be tailored the way Torts would use them in the NHL. And he doesn't impose he own reads on a player on them, but also isn't going to seek a lot of input the other way on callup players. He finds out the 411 from management and then makes his own calls. You can like it or dislike it, but I don't think "he doesn't care" is accurate.

"Not learning from his mistakes." I would say that's subjective. However, the things he considers non-negotiables don't change from team to team. In general, there is evidence that he's evolved in some ways, held firm in other ways.

"Not practicing the shootout." I'm not sure if there's direct evidence, one way or another, that practicing or not practicing the shootout makes a tangible difference on a team's shootout record. We all know the Flyers have the NHl's worst all-time shootout record. But they've mixed in practices during some regimes, and not done it with others. Leaguewide, I don't know how many coaches either work in to the regimen or do not.

"Not practicing anything." This is not accurate. Tortorella absolutely does watch prescout video, does watch and critique his own teams' game video (although the assistant coaches do the heavy lifting in what to select and review with players), and he does target specific areas for practice. Now, that being said, the Torts Flyers do heavily systems-focused work at a later point in training camp than I've seen with previous regimes in camp. He is big on the skating volume, conditioning grind, lots of battle drills and small-area stuff and the level of compete in scrimmages on the front end of camp, and systems work later on.

"Benching Luongo for the Heritage Classic." I can't speak to that particular situation. But, as per the Frost (in Toronto) and Sanheim (in Calgary) scratches last year, I do believe that, if he wants to send a message to a player, doing it in a game the player is especially psyched to play very well could be a deliberate calculation even if that motivation is denied publicly.

"Storming Calgary's dressing room." The previous items on this last might have been categorized as "crazy" by the headline, but I wouldn't call any of them actually crazy. The Calgary thing, though, yeah that nuts. Vancouver has been his only short coaching stint in the NHL. The rest have been rather long-lasting, especially for a coach with the rep for pushing hard. I do think he realizes the Calgary incident was over the line for any professional.
- bmeltzer

so many red flags in this post. The bad outweigh any good he may bring.

How many other nhl/ahl do not play the same systems? Isn't this a big part of development? To have them on the same page when they get to the nhl? So the learning curve is less?

Torts is a pseudo tough guy. To also not talk much one on one is also comical to me in 2023

In some cases yes but overall in that situation, it was not. Many factors came into play with that deal. One was the Flyers overall philosophy of always going for it. Another was the injuries on defense. The other was that the Flyers gave up on Williams and were impatient. Just like they always were and still are until proven otherwise. If they valued Williams higher, they would've kept him.
- MJL

do you have any links or documents to prove this Cliff? They were cup contenders you turd, they should have went for it.


you have to give to get Cliff.

In retrospect because of what Williams wound go on to an accomplish, it wasn’t worth it imo.
- Hextall271

Suppose the 2-1 Game 7 against Tampa went the other way, and the Flyers advanced to the Cup Final. Would it have been worth it? What if they beat Calgary and won the Cup?

Remember: No one has a crystal ball when making a trade. But with no Desjardins, no Ragnarsson, Johnsson played at about 50 percent after getting injury in Game 5 against the Devils and with Kapanen forced to play on the blueline and having to play Timander 18 to 20 minutes in the playoffs, it was a good thing they Markov. He was an absolute warrior in those playoffs. So was Malakhov.

Suppose the 2-1 Game 7 against Tampa went the other way, and the Flyers advanced to the Cup Final. Would it have been worth it? What if they beat Calgary and won the Cup?

Remember: No one has a crystal ball when making a trade. But with no Desjardins, no Ragnarsson, Johnsson played at about 50 percent after getting injury in Game 5 against the Devils and with Kapanen forced to play on the blueline and having to play Timander 18 to 20 minutes in the playoffs, it was a good thing they Markov. He was an absolute warrior in those playoffs. So was Malakhov.
- bmeltzer

Bill their response is but it didn't so bad trade!!!!

Also regarding Justin Williams, he'd been quite injury prone in young career up to that point. But the bigger thing was the Flyers at the time were deep up front while clearly needing another top-4 caliber defenseman.

The problem wasn't the trade. The problem was heeding the NHL's directive to subtract as much as salary as added because there was going to be a lockout coming. The Flyers ended up regretting dumping off Weinrich and Bundy. The depth may very well have been just enough to win the Tampa series and play Calgary in the Cup Final.

Bill their response is but it didn't so bad trade!!!!
- hello it's me 2050

Yup. But, in the real world, no one gets to retro-trade. In it's proper context, the trade made sense and the Flyers were in better position for the playoffs.

Yup. But, in the real world, no one gets to retro-trade. In it's proper context, the trade made sense and the Flyers were in better position for the playoffs.
- bmeltzer

cost of doing business. Kudos to JW for the career he ended up having.

Also regarding Justin Williams, he'd been quite injury prone in young career up to that point. But the bigger thing was the Flyers at the time were deep up front while clearly needing another top-4 caliber defenseman.

The problem wasn't the trade. The problem was heeding the NHL's directive to subtract as much as salary as added because there was going to be a lockout coming. The Flyers ended up regretting dumping off Weinrich and Bundy. The depth may very well have been just enough to win the Tampa series and play Calgary in the Cup Final.
- bmeltzer

I am sure I have asked you this, why did they then dump Danny? Was it strictly because they wanted hatcher and Rathje?

They should have kept one of those 2. Hindsight.

so many red flags in this post. The bad outweigh any good he may bring.

How many other nhl/ahl do not play the same systems? Isn't this a big part of development? To have them on the same page when they get to the nhl? So the learning curve is less?

Torts is a pseudo tough guy. To also not talk much one on one is also comical to me in 2023
- hello it's me 2050

Bill,

Do you have a feel for how many teams in the league operate the same systems in the NHL and AHL? I think it makes sense that teams would synchronize those systems. But I do not feel like a majority of teams do it.

has nothing to do with the original trade imo.
- Peter Richards

But then cant you use the same logic and say the Ellis trade was a good trade? If the intent of the trade was good it over rides the actual result?

But then cant you use the same logic and say the Ellis trade was a good trade? If the intent of the trade was good it over rides the actual result?
- MBFlyerfan

never said it was a bad trade to begin with. Yes he was injury prone, but no one could predict he would have a freak career ending injury. At the time it wasn't a bad trade.

same with the pronger trade.

has nothing to do with intent.

Bill,

Do you have a feel for how many teams in the league operate the same systems in the NHL and AHL? I think it makes sense that teams would synchronize those systems. But I do not feel like a majority of teams do it.
- mickel25

Lots of opinions out there but it's more or less 50-50. For example, Vigneault wanted the Phantoms systems aligned, Torts encouraged Lappy to do whatever he wants systems-wise.

I am sure I have asked you this, why did they then dump Danny? Was it strictly because they wanted hatcher and Rathje?

They should have kept one of those 2. Hindsight.
- hello it's me 2050

Yes, they coveted Hatcher (in particular) and Rathje for years. But there wasn't room with the new cap to have all three.