View Single Post
Old
11-18-2010, 03:32 PM
  #75
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Minutes are irrelevant. Vandermeer played in 72 hockey games the first year he was getting games with the Flyers, the majority of which were played with the Phantoms. If Bartulis was playing 10-15 minutes a game, I would have zero problem with what was going on here... he isn't. If he was playing 20 a night in the AHL, I'd have no problem with it.

He isn't.

So, DrDoom, what I would like from you is evidence that I said the following, "I am perfectly fine with Bob Clarke putting a young player in a position where he cannot play in hockey games during key developmental years."

If you can find that, I will apologize and admit that I am holding Holmgren to a double standard with regard to that. If not, I expect an apology from you.

If you want to get into a discussion of the Flyers doing a horrible job of carving out space for AHLer dating back to Clarke's tenure, there is no debate from me. Actually, I pretty much directly referenced that in the original observation with regard to Bartulis. Flyers have had a tendency to only begrudgingly build space into their lineups for young players and that makes it hard for them to blossom here... they lack patience and trade 'em away before they have a chance to become anything. At times that has made sense (Patrick Sharp playing above the 3rd/4th line), at others it doesn't (making a spot for a young D to start the year as your 6th and see what happens).

And just because Clarke had flaws, does not mean the folks making arguments critical of Clarke don't have flaws in their argument. These are not mutually exclusive things. People act as if Clarke had no success with this team, and only had success here because of his monetary resources. Neither of these observations is true... as his tenure elsewhere demonstrated.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote