HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Philadelphia Flyers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=21)
-   -   What Bobrovsky Winning the Vezina Would Mean For The Flyers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1424705)

ShawnTHW 05-08-2013 04:38 PM

What Bobrovsky Winning the Vezina Would Mean For The Flyers
 
http://thehockeywriters.com/what-bob...or-the-flyers/

It's going to be a kick in the balls and one of the main reasons that I want Holmgren out as GM. Sure he's made some good decisions here and there, but his bad ones have been atrocious. If Bob wins the Vezina it's gonna leave a pit in the stomach of most Flyers fans.

Were any of you OK with the idea of trading Bobrovsky in the first place? We saw flashes of brilliance and I really wanted him to be the goalie of the future, but obviously upper management had other ideas.

Karma 05-08-2013 04:48 PM

I'd be happy if he won the Vezina.

LegionOfDoom91 05-08-2013 04:50 PM

I would blame Homer (if you can't blame Snider) more for the Bryz contract than the Bob trade. Bob apparently wanted out if not given an opportunity here so there's not much you can do there.

There's so many unknown variables with the Bob trade right now to where you can get an accurate read on it. Bob had a great season definitely Vezina worthy but it was a short season. We've seen many goalies have great seasons early in their career and fall off (Mason, Carey, Raycroft, etc.). I'm not saying Bob will do that but I kind of want to see him do it again so I can a good read on him.

We also acquired picks for Bob that turned out to be goalie Anthony Stolarz (2nd round pick) and forward Taylor Leier (4th round). If either of these guys turn out to be something (especially Stolarz) wouldn't that kind of negate this trade?

So for those reasons I wouldn't jump the gun on the Bob trade. I'm not totally against firing Homer either but not because of this trade.

Vikke 05-08-2013 04:54 PM

Incredibly wrong, it wouldn't be like that at all.

BillyShoe1721 05-08-2013 04:54 PM

I'm more angry at Snider for this move. The entire Bryzgalov contract/ordeal has his fingerprints all over it. In reality, we probably sign Bryzgalov anyway because we apparently were bidding against ourselves considering what other goalies went for in that market, but it's for a smaller price, and less term. I was for giving Bobrovsky a chance after he was jerked around in the playoffs, but circumstances were different and it's hard to blame them. Our defense was led by Chris Pronger and Kimmo Timonen, who were both #1 defensemen, and an emerging superstar in Claude Giroux. We were elite goaltending away from being serious cup contenders, and that window was closing fast with Pronger and Timonen's age. It didn't look like Bob could be that guy within the window, so they made a move. It didn't work.

UKFlyers 05-08-2013 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShawnTHW (Post 65623067)
http://thehockeywriters.com/what-bob...or-the-flyers/

It's going to be a kick in the balls and one of the main reasons that I want Holmgren out as GM. Sure he's made some good decisions here and there, but his bad ones have been atrocious. If Bob wins the Vezina it's gonna leave a pit in the stomach of most Flyers fans.

Were any of you OK with the idea of trading Bobrovsky in the first place? We saw flashes of brilliance and I really wanted him to be the goalie of the future, but obviously upper management had other ideas.

I thought most people simply expected it to happen. This one is on Snider as much as it is on Homer, as Bob's chances of being our goalie going forward were done as soon as we signed Bryz, the move that Snider pushed for. I don't think they had much choice in the matter. They couldn't bail on Bryz 1 year into that contract. Bob would have continued as back-up. They were always going to choose Bryz.

DrinkFightFlyers 05-08-2013 04:58 PM

You have to look at the context at the time of the trade. Bob was coming off a good regular season and an awful post-season. At that point in time, with no hindsight, I'm willing to bet a large majority of GMs would do the same thing. He could have just as easily been a flash in the pan (and still may be at this point).

moosehead81 05-08-2013 04:59 PM

Bobrovsky looked like he had some talent and a future his first year 2010-11; 28 wins,13 losses in 54 games but like Richards and Carter and perhaps JVR later, Laviolette and management lost confidence in him and looked at supposedly greener grass over the hill. Even if he doesn't win the Vezina, my guess is he's going to be around a long time and play a significant role with whatever team he plays with during his career. Reminds me a bit of Nikolai Khabibulin, who came in relatively unheralded with the old Winnipeg Jets in 1994-95and ended up playing for some good teams and some not so good teams winning a Stanley Cup and 2 Olympic gold medals. Bobrovsky may do better but I'm damn sure Bryzgalov won't.

The Couturier Effect 05-08-2013 05:00 PM

Bob wanted to start. He wasn't going to get that here, so we gave him what he wanted. Was is the right move? No, but hindsight is 20/20.

I'm happy for him. I really don't think he would be having the same success here.

YuioIklo 05-08-2013 05:04 PM

IIRC, most people on here were glad of the return we've had for Bob.

ShawnTHW 05-08-2013 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers (Post 65623955)
You have to look at the context at the time of the trade. Bob was coming off a good regular season and an awful post-season. At that point in time, with no hindsight, I'm willing to bet a large majority of GMs would do the same thing. He could have just as easily been a flash in the pan (and still may be at this point).

Awful post-season was not necessarily his fault. They treated him very poorly in that run and still, for whatever reason, trusted Michael Leighton in net over Sergei.

I know the argument that he wanted to start, but we should have given him that opportunity and used the extra cap space to get a defense that could play in front of him this past season. Instead we used it on Bryz (who isn't a bad goalie), but you can't expect the numbers he had in a defensive system like Tippett's was in Phoenix. Don't think Lavy has every played a "defense first/offensive second" type of game, so you'd need to have top notch defenders for him to achieve close to the success he had with the Yotes. We just didn't have those type of defenders.

1865 05-08-2013 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShawnTHW (Post 65623067)
http://thehockeywriters.com/what-bob...or-the-flyers/

It's going to be a kick in the balls and one of the main reasons that I want Holmgren out as GM. Sure he's made some good decisions here and there, but his bad ones have been atrocious. If Bob wins the Vezina it's gonna leave a pit in the stomach of most Flyers fans.

Were any of you OK with the idea of trading Bobrovsky in the first place? We saw flashes of brilliance and I really wanted him to be the goalie of the future, but obviously upper management had other ideas.

At risk of raking up all those old leaves, how many atrocious decisions has he made? Bobrovsky doesn't seem to have worked (Stolart might be good though) but what else? He had no say over Bryzgalov.

Jack de la Hoya 05-08-2013 05:53 PM

Bobrovsky winning the Vezina with the Blue Jackets would mean very little, as he was never going to win the Vezina with the Flyers.

It was a risky trade at the time--if Bob put it together, it was always going to look back in hindsight. But let's not pretend that that was inevitable.

Ryker 05-08-2013 05:53 PM

Who cares whether he wins the Vezina or not, it doesn't change ANYTHING. The season is already over for him, we've seen how well he played, so get your whining and crying over and done with, no need to repeat the entire process in a month.

Beef Invictus 05-08-2013 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers (Post 65623955)
You have to look at the context at the time of the trade. Bob was coming off a good regular season and an awful post-season. At that point in time, with no hindsight, I'm willing to bet a large majority of GMs would do the same thing. He could have just as easily been a flash in the pan (and still may be at this point).

You're leaving out a huge chunk of context: His undeniable talent and potential and young age, meaning he had lots of time to put it together.

Jack de la Hoya 05-08-2013 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beef Invictus (Post 65629595)
You're leaving out a huge chunk of context: His undeniable talent and potential and young age, meaning he had lots of time to put it together.

But he also needed consistent, relatively pressure-free playing time to put it all together, which he was never going to get here.

GKJ 05-08-2013 06:35 PM

This is a chuckle while sipping on the beer compared to the roost-full of eggs everyone had on their face last year when the Kings won the Cup. If anything happens, it will be a culmination of a series of events, not just this one. Big Ed's not going to hang Holmgren by his toes, because this was yet another repercussion of his "this will never happen again" goaltending mandate.

Beef Invictus 05-08-2013 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya (Post 65629695)
But he also needed consistent, relatively pressure-free playing time to put it all together, which he was never going to get here.

Because they signed Bryzgalov.

Edit: What I mean is, they went with someone who was clearly going to be the starter due to his cap hit, relegating Bob to inconsistent backup starts...which I wouldn't mind if he'd had some AHL time, but he didn't. If they'd gone with a vet, like Vokoun, they could have split time and had solid support for Bob.

TheDrizzle81 05-08-2013 06:51 PM

it'd mean i was right all along.

MsMeow 05-08-2013 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beef Invictus (Post 65629595)
You're leaving out a huge chunk of context: His undeniable talent and potential and young age, meaning he had lots of time to put it together.

Not to mention his work ethic.

DrinkFightFlyers 05-08-2013 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShawnTHW (Post 65624499)
Awful post-season was not necessarily his fault. They treated him very poorly in that run and still, for whatever reason, trusted Michael Leighton in net over Sergei.

I know the argument that he wanted to start, but we should have given him that opportunity and used the extra cap space to get a defense that could play in front of him this past season. Instead we used it on Bryz (who isn't a bad goalie), but you can't expect the numbers he had in a defensive system like Tippett's was in Phoenix. Don't think Lavy has every played a "defense first/offensive second" type of game, so you'd need to have top notch defenders for him to achieve close to the success he had with the Yotes. We just didn't have those type of defenders.

Sure it wasn't entirely his fault, but he still played poorly. With hindsight it looks like a bad move at this point. But at the time, given the circumstances, I think most teams make the same move (signing a proven, former Vezina finalist rather than going with an unproven kid who imploded in his first post-season).

Both choices have risks. We are living the risks of getting Bryz...poor performance out of the "proven" commodity and stellar performance out of the young guy who imploded. There is also a risk in keeping Bob and not going after Bryz...Bryz plays well elsewhere, Bob fizzles and we are again looking for a franchise goalie.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beef Invictus (Post 65629595)
You're leaving out a huge chunk of context: His undeniable talent and potential and young age, meaning he had lots of time to put it together.

Oh for sure, but having lots of talent, and having lots of time doesn't mean anything will actually happen. With the benefit of hindsight, it looks like it was a bad move. Bob put it together and played out of his mind this year. Bryz meanwhile has **** the bed at every turn. But again, at the time, neither of those things were guarantees. In fact, I would argue that at the time it seemed much more likely that Bryz plays at an elite level and Bob doesn't.

I would also like to point out that Bob has played three seasons. One good one, one bad one, and this one (which was only half a year). I'm not taking away from what he has done, but before we start getting too crazy let's see how he does next season.

Beef Invictus 05-08-2013 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers (Post 65635753)
Sure it wasn't entirely his fault, but he still played poorly. With hindsight it looks like a bad move at this point. But at the time, given the circumstances, I think most teams make the same move (signing a proven, former Vezina finalist rather than going with an unproven kid who imploded in his first post-season).

Both choices have risks. We are living the risks of getting Bryz...poor performance out of the "proven" commodity and stellar performance out of the young guy who imploded. There is also a risk in keeping Bob and not going after Bryz...Bryz plays well elsewhere, Bob fizzles and we are again looking for a franchise goalie.



Oh for sure, but having lots of talent, and having lots of time doesn't mean anything will actually happen. With the benefit of hindsight, it looks like it was a bad move. Bob put it together and played out of his mind this year. Bryz meanwhile has **** the bed at every turn. But again, at the time, neither of those things were guarantees. In fact, I would argue that at the time it seemed much more likely that Bryz plays at an elite level and Bob doesn't.

I would also like to point out that Bob has played three seasons. One good one, one bad one, and this one (which was only half a year). I'm not taking away from what he has done, but before we start getting too crazy let's see how he does next season.

Hindsight has little do to with it, there are plenty of people who thought going the Bryz route was incorrect at the time, because it was pretty clear Bob could be a starting goaltender. It was also clear, through simple math and knowledge of player career arcs, that for the long term Bob was a better choice than a 30 year old Bryz.

SchennSational1022* 05-08-2013 07:36 PM

Taylor Leier will be an NHL player, I have a weird feeling

Hockeypete49 05-08-2013 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShawnTHW (Post 65623067)
http://thehockeywriters.com/what-bob...or-the-flyers/

It's going to be a kick in the balls and one of the main reasons that I want Holmgren out as GM. Sure he's made some good decisions here and there, but his bad ones have been atrocious. If Bob wins the Vezina it's gonna leave a pit in the stomach of most Flyers fans.

Were any of you OK with the idea of trading Bobrovsky in the first place? We saw flashes of brilliance and I really wanted him to be the goalie of the future, but obviously upper management had other ideas.

Happy for Bob. But I could care less. Whats done is done move on. I was fine with the trade. Get back to me in four or five years to see how things shake out.

MiamiScreamingEagles 05-08-2013 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hockeypete49 (Post 65638877)
Happy for Bob. But I could care less. Whats done is done move on. I was fine with the trade. Get back to me in four or five years to see how things shake out.

No two situations are mirror images and while times and situations dictate an emphasis in that philosophy, there is precedent with Pete Peeters who won the Vezina in his first season after being traded by the Flyers. Many in the hockey world ridiculed the trade but then Brad McCrimmon turned out to be pretty good as I recall. (as an aside, I have yet to read all the posts in the thread, not sure if that has been mentioned).


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:05 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.