View Single Post
10-13-2008, 12:14 PM
Registered User
Jester's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by FlyHigh View Post
Okay just a couple things.

1) I think nearly everybody was expecting Parent to become a 2nd pairing D by some point this season, I personally have said I expected it after around Game 50 and I thought it would be huge because he's the type of guy that will be able to play 21-22 solid minutes per night.
Expectations and reality are two different things. High prospects always have high expectations attached to them...sometimes fairly, sometimes unfairly. Thinking Parent might develop into a 2nd pairing guy this year (and I do believe he has a good chance of it), doesn't make him one today and doesn't mean he ever will be one. If he doesn't...what then? We got nothing.

2) How do you know Holmgren didn't try to do anything? I mean, D right now is at a premium. Would you have been happy with a Lupul for Ohlund trade or something like that? The Flyers were definitely in the J-Bouw sweepstakes, I think it's obvious Holmgren has tried to improve, but top-4 D are just crazy expensive right now.
Crazy expensive...and Crazy necessary. They're expensive because you absolutely have to have 'em if you're going to consistently compete. You want to win? Pay the price.

Holmgren may very well have tried to do something this offseason...but he didn't get it done, and that's on him. Sports results, at the end of the day, are one of the few binary things in life. There's lots of gray area until the final whistle, but once it sounds you either won or lost...either got the guy you need, or didn't.

3) We've been over the Eminger on WSH situation 500x, Boudreau wanted a top-4 (Green, Poti, Schultz, Morrison) and then an extra 2 thugs (Jurcina, Erskine) for the bottom pairing. Also, Eminger is just a classic, classic needs a change of scenery type guy. I think his decision-making needs some work, but I think you can attribute that to a lot of things, he wasn't the only guy out there making mistakes. The key for him is confidence IMO.
That's all fine and good...but can you really not see how effing Flyer-biased that narrative you just told is? If Eminger was good enough, he's on the ice for the's that simple. The rest of what you wrote is rationalization for why he wasn't on the ice. He very may well turn it around here, but after 200 NHL games it's far more likely he is getting to be what he is with a quickness...a guy touted as a two-way player with a career high of 20 pts isn't getting me excited.

4) I'm also a Vaananen believer, especially after seeing him last night, he won't give us much offensively, but he moves pretty well and is solid in his own end.
He's a third pairing guy. Fine at what he does, but nothing special and certainly not someone we want to be banking on for 20 minutes a night--meaning a pivotal player for this team this year. That's how weak our D is.

5) Injuries definitely happen, but I think it's unfair for Holmgren to expect 2 14-week injuries before the season even starts, that's definitely a strong kick in the teeth.
Before, during...whatever, it doesn't really matter. You have to have the ability to play with significant injuries on your roster. We don't have that ability. That's on the GM.

I have been one of the strongest critics of Stevens from the word go, but I'll flat out tell you that this team, this year, is a terribly flawed one from the management side. They've given Stevens a really raw deal on the blue line and did NOTHING to fix this teams personnel problems from last year. Last year the system wasn't tailored to the personnel we had, but our personnel were consistent and you knew what you were going to get. This year we got a whole lot of ???? and basically the hope that some of them will work out. If you want to give Holmgren the thumbs up on this offseason, that's fine. I'm not. He's too committed to his forwards, and has failed to construct a balanced team.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote