HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

#49: Rangers @ Flyers - January 21, 2010 - 7:00 PM (ET)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-21-2010, 07:49 AM
  #26
buff
Registered User
 
buff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Quebec city
Country: Canada
Posts: 286
vCash: 500
I swear my #12 Flyers jersey all day long at job to make fun of all Habs fan here!!!! Go Simon and go Flyers. We need that 2 points.

buff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 07:59 AM
  #27
BackWithaVengeance
Registered User
 
BackWithaVengeance's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Good old Europe
Posts: 1,204
vCash: 50
If you're right, I'll send you the finest beer here from Germany (we're pretty good at these kind of things ) all over the the Atlantic to your home. I swear.

BackWithaVengeance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 08:10 AM
  #28
Kaktus*
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Posts: 22,389
vCash: 500
Grioux will center JVR and Asham. I guess that means Powe will play with Gagne and Richards? I would love Lavi to double shift Briere with both Crater and Richard lines.

Hopefully someone slaps Prospal around. He celebrates every point like it's a SC game 7 gwg.

Kaktus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 08:15 AM
  #29
Morinisbear
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Schwenksville?, PA
Posts: 957
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BackWithaVengeance View Post
If you're right, I'll send you the finest beer here from Germany (we're pretty good at these kind of things ) all over the the Atlantic to your home. I swear.
I'll take you up on that. If he gets the hattrick without the assists, can I get a lesser value beer from Germany?

Morinisbear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 08:19 AM
  #30
Kambo
 
Kambo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pennsauken, NJ
Country: Ireland
Posts: 5,357
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Kambo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jules801 View Post
I'm bringing my Mom to this game. I hope it's a good one!
Me too. Last game I took her to was Black Friday and then we went on the massive slide. So I'm hoping bringing her again would put us on a massive win streak. I apologize in advance if the former happens again.

Kambo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 08:22 AM
  #31
Kambo
 
Kambo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pennsauken, NJ
Country: Ireland
Posts: 5,357
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Kambo
Quote:
Originally Posted by BackWithaVengeance View Post
If you're right, I'll send you the finest beer here from Germany (we're pretty good at these kind of things ) all over the the Atlantic to your home. I swear.
Bier ist sehr gut, ja.

Kambo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 08:36 AM
  #32
Morinisbear
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Schwenksville?, PA
Posts: 957
vCash: 500
Ich liebe Bier!

Morinisbear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 10:22 AM
  #33
jb**
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Planet Lovetron
Country: Italy
Posts: 8,556
vCash: 500
Gagne and Richards have no chemistry what so ever. Having powe playing with those 2 doesn’t help. He doesn’t have the skill set to get that line going. Gagne, brier, and Giroux have played well when they were together. They really dont have an ideal top 9. Giroux is better at center so who knows.

Jvr- Richards- Carter
Gagne-briere- Giroux
Hartnell-powe- asham

jb** is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 10:33 AM
  #34
Mike Richards 18
Registered User
 
Mike Richards 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 1,516
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NWO View Post
Gagne and Richards have no chemistry what so ever. Having powe playing with those 2 doesn’t help. He doesn’t have the skill set to get that line going. Gagne, brier, and Giroux have played well when they were together. They really dont have an ideal top 9. Giroux is better at center so who knows.

Jvr- Richards- Carter
Gagne-briere- Giroux
Hartnell-powe- asham
as much as i am open to Hartnell being moved he cant be playing on the third line with those players

Maybe
Asham Richards Carter
Gagne Briere JVR
Hartnell Giroux Powe

but even that idk

Mike Richards 18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 10:36 AM
  #35
Unstable
Registered User
 
Unstable's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Exiled in NoVA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,146
vCash: 500
Is this your longest ever, MSE? Pretty impressive regardless!

Go Flyers!!!

Unstable is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 10:37 AM
  #36
jb**
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Planet Lovetron
Country: Italy
Posts: 8,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Richards 18 View Post
as much as i am open to Hartnell being moved he cant be playing on the third line with those players

Maybe
Asham Richards Carter
Gagne Briere JVR
Hartnell Giroux Powe

but even that idk
why dont you think hartnell shoudl be playing with those 2? He has done nothing lately. Let that line crash and cause a littlel havoc.

jb** is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 10:43 AM
  #37
Mike Richards 18
Registered User
 
Mike Richards 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 1,516
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NWO View Post
why dont you think hartnell shoudl be playing with those 2? He has done nothing lately. Let that line crash and cause a littlel havoc.
because there is really no one capable of getting the puck in the zone and doing anything with it. Asham has flashes and Powe is ok and Hartnell is terrible. the LCB is capable of dumping and chasing and generating something but idk if your third line combo idea will work

Mike Richards 18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 10:49 AM
  #38
Kaktus*
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Posts: 22,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NWO View Post
Gagne and Richards have no chemistry what so ever. Having powe playing with those 2 doesn’t help. He doesn’t have the skill set to get that line going. Gagne, brier, and Giroux have played well when they were together. They really dont have an ideal top 9. Giroux is better at center so who knows.

Jvr- Richards- Carter
Gagne-briere- Giroux
Hartnell-powe- asham
I disagree. The only problem is that Gagne hasn't been finishing his glorious chances lately.

But if both Gagne and Hartnell can not finish I would consider switching them

Hartnell played with Richards and was very effective

Kaktus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 10:52 AM
  #39
Sakaarnis
Registered User
 
Sakaarnis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Bay of smokes
Country: Iceland
Posts: 541
vCash: 500
Happy birthday to Bārtulis. Please score!

Sakaarnis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 10:53 AM
  #40
flyersfan420
Registered User
 
flyersfan420's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,257
vCash: 500
come on team!! we need this game!! win

flyersfan420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 10:54 AM
  #41
TheKingPin
Registered User
 
TheKingPin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,545
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NWO View Post
Gagne and Richards have no chemistry what so ever. Having powe playing with those 2 doesn’t help. He doesn’t have the skill set to get that line going. Gagne, brier, and Giroux have played well when they were together. They really dont have an ideal top 9. Giroux is better at center so who knows.

Jvr- Richards- Carter
Gagne-briere- Giroux
Hartnell-powe- asham
Those lines dont look too bad but....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaktus View Post
I disagree. The only problem is that Gagne hasn't been finishing his glorious chances lately.

But if both Gagne and Hartnell can not finish I would consider switching them

Hartnell played with Richards and was very effective
Exactly what I came here to say. Gagne has had a TON of chances. Wide open net, just dont whiff or shoot it into his chest, chances. I think leaving Giroux with JVR and building some chemistry could pay off for the next 10 years or so. Imagine if we can keep those two and have them play with eachother for a career. It would be beautiful. LETS GO FLYERS! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

TheKingPin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 10:54 AM
  #42
Wolfy*
The Hobbit Rules!
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,513
vCash: 500
Crush some Rangers! I wanna see a lot of hitting tonight, let's drain their energy

Wolfy* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 10:56 AM
  #43
IrishSniper87
Registered User
 
IrishSniper87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Media, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sa cyred View Post
Your gonna need to take a look at the past years. NO team that was .500 has made playoffs. Anyway, even if we are .500 and make playoffs, our chances of going far would be pretty slim. Of course there are always teams that do that well after sucking during the season, but those are diamonds in the rough.

Oh and Im not counting OT losses... Regular wins to losses ratio.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbage Goal View Post
You said, in exact words, that "we're .500 right now"...and we're three wins above .500 (OT/SO losses excluded of course).
See, what pisses me off is OT losses are excluded, but OT wins are not. It's like losing a game in OT is not as important as losing a regular game, BUT winning an OT game is JUST as important as winning an regular game.

I look at a 24-21-3 record as 0.500 because out of 48 games, the team only won 24. That's 0.500 in my book. I do however realize the USEFULNESS of using the points system in that it allows teams to differentiate HOW they lost.

A 24-21-3 team and a 24-18-6 team are both 0.500 in my book, but the team with only 18 outright losses is a team I would rank higher. I do kinda hate teams like the Islanders who have an obscene amount of OT losses that put them ahead of us even though they have 2 LESS wins in 2 MORE games. That is kinda silly.

I would sort all teams by WINS and use OT losses as the tiebreaker.

I mean, look at the Standings

FLYERS - 48 GP 24W 21L 3OTL (I'd consider this a 0.500 team)
ISLANDERS - 50 GP 22 W 20L 8OTL (I'd consider this a 0.440 team)

and the Islanders are 1 point AHEAD of us in the standings. They are almost playing for the tie!

Maybe change the point system?

Win in Regulation or OT = 3 points
Win in SO = 2 points
Loss in OT or SO = 1 point
Loss in regulation = 0 points

A team who wins in regulation gets 3 points and the loser gets nothing.
A team who wins in OT gets 3 points and the loser gets 1.
A team who wins the SO gets 2 points and the loser gets 1.

Much better IMHO. Stresses importance of winning games in regulation or OT and decreases usefulness of OT losses and SO's.

IrishSniper87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 10:59 AM
  #44
Unstable
Registered User
 
Unstable's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Exiled in NoVA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,146
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IrishSniper87 View Post

Maybe change the point system?

Win in Regulation or OT = 3 points
Win in SO = 2 points
Loss in OT or SO = 1 point
Loss in regulation = 0 points

A team who wins in regulation gets 3 points and the loser gets nothing.
A team who wins in OT gets 3 points and the loser gets 1.
A team who wins the SO gets 2 points and the loser gets 1.

Much better IMHO. Stresses importance of winning games in regulation or OT and decreases usefulness of OT losses and SO's.
Point inflation is one thing, but the current system distorts the scale by rewarding losing in overtime. If losing in overtime is better for the loser, it must be worse for the winner. Only way to show that is to make EVERY game worth 3 points.

Sorry, misread your original post. I don't see why OT winners should still get 3 points and SO winners should only get 2. Give them both 2.

3-0
2-1
1-2
0-3

Unstable is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 10:59 AM
  #45
Pwood
B-B-B-Bus can't swim
 
Pwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Kentucky
Country: United States
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Pwood Send a message via Yahoo to Pwood
I know Gagne has experience problems recently with finishing his shots, but honestly, he has been averaging about 2 shots per night since the last Rangers game, which, to me, is not a lot, especially when Carter takes at least 5 a game (had 8 shots against Columbus). In the Lightning game, he didn't have a single shot on goal. If he would shoot more, I think he would fair much better on the score board. You can't score if you don't shoot.

Pwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 11:03 AM
  #46
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 115,949
vCash: 625
I like this point system better:

1 point under a "win column" for a win

1 point under a "loss column" for a loss

Teams are rated on how many "points" in the "win column" and the 8 highest teams make the playoffs.





The point system is ridiculous. No game ends in a tie now. You either win a game or you lose it. The OTL's keep more teams in the playoffs for longer.

You suck at shootouts you say? Oh well, you should have won the game before it got to the shootout.

__________________
Philadelphia's Real Alternative
(ynotradio.net)

Stop Feeding the Rumor-Monger

"I wonder if Norstrom has Forsberg's spleen mounted on his wall." - KINGS17

My 50 Favorite Albums of 2014 (sorry it's late)
GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 11:16 AM
  #47
MiD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pwood View Post
I know Gagne has experience problems recently with finishing his shots, but honestly, he has been averaging about 2 shots per night since the last Rangers game, which, to me, is not a lot, especially when Carter takes at least 5 a game (had 8 shots against Columbus). In the Lightning game, he didn't have a single shot on goal. If he would shoot more, I think he would fair much better on the score board. You can't score if you don't shoot.
shooting from behind the net doesn't help either...

MiD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 11:38 AM
  #48
Dash22
Registered User
 
Dash22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Buckingham, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 951
vCash: 500
50/50 shot I will be heading down to the game tonight, hoping that nothing goes wrong at work so I can head out around 5pm.

If not...oh well.

LETS GO FLYERS!

Dash22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 11:45 AM
  #49
sa cyred
Offseason...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: South Jersey
Country: Cuba
Posts: 16,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbage Goal View Post
You said, in exact words, that "we're .500 right now"...and we're three wins above .500 (OT/SO losses excluded of course).
Then we are a .533333333333333333 team? I dont know what else to go buy. I few wins off of even I count as .500. I kinda of rounded here man, but thats not really the main point here. We still have 21 losses and 24 wins, which isnt good at all. Thats what it comes down to.

sa cyred is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2010, 12:00 PM
  #50
DrinkFightFlyers
Provolone & The Neck
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 14,467
vCash: 470
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Go Flyers!

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:43 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.