View Single Post
03-03-2013, 12:31 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NorCal
Posts: 3,395
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by jml87 View Post
But then you have Giroux to be your first liner so again, what is the problem? Even if they are only second liners like you believe, you still have Giroux up with Hartnell to be your first line. The only reason why that wouldn't happen is coaching which has nothing to do with Carter and Richards.

Richards had a problem with Pronger and Lavi? Well, now Pronger is gone and Laviolette's future is shaky. You gave up your franchise players, younger and more durable, cause the coach and the known locker room problem, didn't like them. So, what was the point?

And you still haven't addressed the fact that your goaltending behind them was awful. You could have Sidney Crosby, Malkin, and Stamkos on your team but you still wouldn't win a thing with a goalie that gives up goals like this:

Every time the opposing team is in your zone. Ed Snider may really want a cup, but he's also stuck in the 1970s mindset and he completely overreacts by doing things like signing a 30 year old goaltender to a 10 year contract.

The Kings won cause they held onto their players and developed the right team. Brown and Kopitar didn't make it past the first round of the playoffs until last year, but Lombardi didn't give up on them. They waited and they traded for the pieces they needed until they had a very well rounded team. Then they won.

I don't understand how hitting the self destruct button every five years only to follow the same path every single time, is going to get the Flyers a Stanley Cup. Richards and Carter are only the latest in a long line of outstanding forwards who haven't won a Cup in Philly. The Flyers losing had nothing to do with them.
Well, I agree about the Goaltending, and Bryz's deal...its not what I would have done. For disclosure, I'm a believer that a goalie can be helped alot by playing certain systems, I'm not a big fan of goaltending stats being a sole indicator of a goalie's performance.

The Pronger situation is sort of unfortunate for us, he was playing at a high level for us, and his injury was kind of a freak injury. Something like this could happen to anyone's "asset". But certainly, losing him has been a major setback, because of his on ice hole and also that we gave up so much to get him.

The point, IMO, is that we wanted to switch to the veteran leadership we had, we had a young guy coming up who was going to be the face of the franchise, and we got VERY good deals for both players. I don't think we would have traded them if we hadn't.

I do think Snider got tired of Richards and Carter not being who they wanted them to be. We had already traded their BFFs in Lupul and Upshall.

I don't think they were traded for anything on-ice related.

achdumeingute is offline   Reply With Quote