I disagree, Emery was essentially a tryout for a franchise goalie. If he didn't get hurt, I guarantee he is sitting on a 3ish million contract here to be 'our guy.'
Considering he made that signing before he even knew how the UFA market was going to pan out (not like everybody else was interested in Emery), I'd say it was a rash move without a lot of thought behind it.
Also, it's not a good time to hold 'tryouts for a franchise goalie' when you get sacrificed your future for a 34 year-old d-man.
its good to see at least a few people understand what Homer is doing..
signing Leighton is a good move, hate him or not, he deserves to be back..
now personaly as much as i'd like to see him as our starter, i do feel its best both for him and the team for whoever else is here in net, for them to "fight" it out at training camp for the position to start..
i dont like the idea of handing someone a position based on salary or assumed ability level..
having the 2 main goalies fight for the right to start, will keep them both honest, and make dam sure their A-games are lined up and ready to go..
Please do not stop sending in your thuoghts. I get a laugh every time I read them. By the way you should be a writer for some comedy show
He's right. There's no reason to sign Leighton today. What team is going to give him a better set of circumstances on the free agent market with Mason, Turco, Nabokov, and potentially Ellis still out there? Nobody. This is Leighton's only shot to be a starting goaltender and should jump at the opportunity right away if Holmgren is dumb enough to offer him a contract to be the starter.
its good to see at least a few people understand what Homer is doing..
signing Leighton is a good move, hate him or not, he deserves to be back..
now personaly as much as i'd like to see him as our starter, i do feel its best both for him and the team for whoever else is here in net, for them to "fight" it out at training camp for the position to start..
i dont like the idea of handing someone a position based on salary or assumed ability level..
having the 2 main goalies fight for the right to start, will keep them both honest, and make dam sure their A-games are lined up and ready to go..
but im stil pulling for Leights.. Go man Go..
im not crazy about leights, but he is good for team morale and much better than boosh, so whats the harm in signing him and then waiving boosh based on whether or not we get nabby/biron/turco/mason or whoever...
valiquette
its good to see at least a few people understand what Homer is doing..
signing Leighton is a good move, hate him or not, he deserves to be back..
now personaly as much as i'd like to see him as our starter, i do feel its best both for him and the team for whoever else is here in net, for them to "fight" it out at training camp for the position to start..
i dont like the idea of handing someone a position based on salary or assumed ability level..
having the 2 main goalies fight for the right to start, will keep them both honest, and make dam sure their A-games are lined up and ready to go..
but im stil pulling for Leights.. Go man Go..
I'm assuming that you're over the age of 10, and if that's true and you've really been a Flyer fan for life, I'd like to point out that if the Flyers go into the year with Leighton/Boucher we will have our worst goalie [tandom] in the last 15+ years with the exception of Jeff Hackett, who could at least blame it on vertigo.
Why would a team competing for the Cup ever want to do that?
I still don't understand why so many of you guys are assuming he didn't offer him a low contract just like he did with Nabby and Turco. I'll be upset too if he actually does sign him for 2 million or something like that, but the odds of that happening are very slim.
Pretty much no one wants to see Leighton/Boucher as our tandem next season, but that doesn't mean some of us wouldn't like to have Leighton back. Fact is Leighton was CLEARLY our best goalie last season. Better than Emery and much better than Boucher. Not exactly saying a lot, I know, but we've proven we can win games with him in net. Yes, the Finals were a disaster for him, but I'm willing to give the man another chance based on the rest of his play last season. Get him signed to a reasonable deal for around what Boucher is making, trade/waive Boucher, and then continue going after another guy like Turco or Mason. Would you guys really hate it all that much if that's Homer's plan?
No need to start panicking and assuming this means Leighton/Boucher is what we're going with.
In all seriousness, WTF is Homer's plan with this offseason?
1a) We traded for Hamhuis' rights; tried and failed to sign him.
1b) Yesterday there were reports that Holmgren was all hot and bothered about Volchenkov, and I read somewhere today that we're also interested in Paul Martin. Given all those options, and your interest in 'em... why trade for Hamhuis' rights?
2a) Related to the above, he was babbling about keeping all these D, which would obviously constrict our cap space and leave our dick in the wind on signing a goalie of any merit.
2b) We "trade" for the negotiating rights to Nabokov, and are allowed to talk to Turco (who we apparently made a contract offer to).
2c) We now have an "imminent" re-signing of Michael Leighton? Why? The two goalies you've already talked to are unsigned and probably just want to see what the market is like. There is absolutely no good reason to sign Michael Leighton today... did we learn nothing from last year?
Stop running around like a friggin chicken with its head cut off.
The problem with all of this is the use of such phrases as, "There were reports". There is a lot of conjecture involved. This is why folks go nuts over Eklund, because they act as if every bit of rumor or hint of "talks" is true.
I'm assuming that you're over the age of 10, and if that's true and you've really been a Flyer fan for life, I'd like to point out that if the Flyers go into the year with Leighton/Boucher we will have our worst goalie [tandom] in the last 15+ years with the exception of Jeff Hackett, who could at least blame it on vertigo.
Why would a team competing for the Cup ever want to do that?
I still don't understand why so many of you guys are assuming he didn't offer him a low contract just like he did with Nabby and Turco. I'll be upset too if he actually does sign him for 2 million or something like that, but the odds of that happening are very slim.
Pretty much no one wants to see Leighton/Boucher as our tandem next season, but that doesn't mean some of us wouldn't like to have Leighton back. Fact is Leighton was CLEARLY our best goalie last season. Better than Emery and much better than Boucher. Not exactly saying a lot, I know, but we've proven we can win games with him in net. Yes, the Finals were a disaster for him, but I'm willing to give the man another chance based on the rest of his play last season. Get him signed to a reasonable deal for around what Boucher is making, trade/waive Boucher, and then continue going after another guy like Turco or Mason. Would you guys really hate it all that much if that's Homer's plan?
No need to start panicking and assuming this means Leighton/Boucher is what we're going with.
I agree with everything you said except this. Emery played well in the few games that he played healthy and then he played with a hip that was literally deteriorating and dying. That's when he started to lose a lot. So you can't really compare Leighton to Emery and say Leighton was better. It's just not a fair or accurate comparison.
With that said, if you take Emery out of the equation, the only goalie Leighton had to compete with was Boucher so it's not like he had much competition, did he?
2009 was a little hint of healthy Emery, then a little hint of injured Emery, then a little hint of Boucher, then an ass-load of Leighton, then a little bit more of Boucher. So it was really more Leighton+Boucher then Emery+Boucher.
its good to see at least a few people understand what Homer is doing..
signing Leighton is a good move, hate him or not, he deserves to be back..
now personaly as much as i'd like to see him as our starter, i do feel its best both for him and the team for whoever else is here in net, for them to "fight" it out at training camp for the position to start..
i dont like the idea of handing someone a position based on salary or assumed ability level..
having the 2 main goalies fight for the right to start, will keep them both honest, and make dam sure their A-games are lined up and ready to go..
but im stil pulling for Leights.. Go man Go..
Curious, exactly how long has your life been so far?
I agree with everything you said except this. Emery played well in the few games that he played healthy and then he played with a hip that was literally deteriorating and dying. That's when he started to lose a lot. So you can't really compare Leighton to Emery and say Leighton was better. It's just not a fair or accurate comparison.
With that said, if you take Emery out of the equation, the only goalie Leighton had to compete with was Boucher so it's not like he had much competition, did he?
Yeah, that's a fair point. I was unintentionally being misleading there, Leighton was better than Emery last season if you compare their years as a whole, but the injury obviously factored into that. Regardless though, he's an upgrade over Boucher as the backup and I'd be stunned if he's been offered anything that isn't very comparable to what Boucher makes now.
if tim pannaccio uses the word "flyerdom" one more time, i swear im going to track him down myself and beat him with his computer that apparently is sans a spell checker.
2009 was a little hint of healthy Emery, then a little hint of injured Emery, then a little hint of Boucher, then an ass-load of Leighton, then a little bit more of Boucher. So it was really more Leighton+Boucher then Emery+Boucher.
Well.. yeah, but the question was to get chimrichalds18 to elaborate.
if tim pannaccio uses the word "flyerdom" one more time, i swear im going to track him down myself and beat him with his computer that apparently is sans a spell checker.
Make sure you video it and put it on youtube immediately.
if tim pannaccio uses the word "flyerdom" one more time, i swear im going to track him down myself and beat him with his computer that apparently is sans a spell checker.
Nothing personal, but your avatar is horrible. Why would you use the Rags logo template for anything Flyers?
