HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Notices

I love this team

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-26-2010, 05:21 AM
  #76
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,122
vCash: 500
To be honest, what Flyers fan doesn't love this team right now?

SolidSnakeUS is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 05:40 AM
  #77
HoverCarle*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to HoverCarle*
Chaos what about Tallon? He pretty much built a cup winner, but was still canned before they won a cup.

"Look how good the hawks are!!" Didnt work for him. He ruined Chicago's chance of having a dynasty by overpaying guys like Campbell, Huet, Versteeg, Big Buf, Barker etc.

And you cant use hindsight to judge moves made this off season. Leighton, Shelley and Walker/Gagne were awful moves then and they still are now. Meszaros and O'Donnell are awesome, but I know I expected them to be solid. Bob is great but im sure Holmgren wasnt planning on having him in the NHL this year.


Last edited by HoverCarle*: 11-26-2010 at 05:53 AM.
HoverCarle* is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 06:00 AM
  #78
chaosof99*
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 16,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovercraft View Post
Chaos what about Tallon? He pretty much built a cup winner, but was still canned before they won a cup.

"Look how good the hawks are!!" Didnt work for him. He ruined Chicago's chance of having a dynasty by overpaying guys like Campbell, Huet, Versteeg, Big Buf, etc
What about Tallon? Tallon built a team that won a Stanley Cup and basically got no thanks at all for it and that's what really disgusts me. "He ruined Chicago's chances of having a dynasty" is perhaps the greediest and stupidest complaint I've ever heard! They won a ****ing Cup! You know how hard that ****ing **** is and then people start complaining because they probably won't be winning multiples. And I have to use probably because it is only speculation whether or not they will win another Cup in the near future. If somebody said that in front of me, I might just punch them in the face.

Matter of fact is, overpaying players like Campbell, Huet, Versteeg and Byfuglien is what allowed them to have those players on their team and which is also directly responsible for them winning the Cup. Tallon built a Cup winner. People should be appreciative of that fact. Instead he got canned and people give him no credit.

But guys like Jester appear to be willing to do the same **** here. If the Flyers won the Stanley Cup last season, or if they do it in the near future, it will be in a large part because of the team Holmgren built, yet I expect them to give him absolutely no credit regardless of whether he still is the manager or not out of pure spite and their delusion that they would have done a better job than he did.

And worse, I'd expect the same guys to ***** next season just as much because they wouldn't know how to appreciate a Cup win as I think they'd rather live in misery so they can stroke their own egos and declare "see, I told you so".


Last edited by chaosof99*: 11-26-2010 at 06:09 AM.
chaosof99* is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 06:05 AM
  #79
chaosof99*
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 16,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovercraft View Post
And you cant use hindsight to judge moves made this off season. Leighton, Shelley and Walker/Gagne were awful moves then and they still are now. Meszaros and O'Donnell are awesome, but I know I expected them to be solid. Bob is great but im sure Holmgren wasnt planning on having him in the NHL this year.
You win some, you lose some. Leighton hasn't even played a ****ing game yet and he worked for this team pretty well last season. Walker is an unknown quantity, we wouldn't be able to afford Gagne on this team anyway, and all Gagne has done so far is amass a -8 and put himself on LTIR. And Shelley is definitely overpaid, but hasn't really been hurting this team so far.

I believe I've gone over most of this crap in the post you've responded too, though much more generalized.

You necessarily have to use hindsight to see the impact of moves by a GM, because there isn't any other metric do use. Everything else is just speculation. The effectiveness of a general manager must necessarily reflect in the succcess or lack thereof under his watch, and this team has been very ****ing good under Holmgren, especially considering that it was in last place when he took over.

chaosof99* is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 06:09 AM
  #80
HoverCarle*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to HoverCarle*
Tallon gets credit, which is why Florida hired him to build them a new team, but he is just like Holmgren. Great eye for talent, piss poor cap management. Imagine if Huet hadnt gone overseas? Chicago would have lost Sharp or Bolland too.

I don't despise Holmgren, but he does have big flaws and anyone who cant see that is fooling themselves. I am very thankful for this team, and I give Holmgren credit for this great team.

And as I have said on many occasions, his cap management seems to be getting better (Giroux, Carter). If he smartens up and puts Walker in the AHL when hes healthy, I will give him huge props. Howver judging by Gauthier and Jones, he will **** us over with Walker too

Quote:
You win some, you lose some. Leighton hasn't even played a ****ing game yet and he worked for this team pretty well last season. Walker is an unknown quantity, we wouldn't be able to afford Gagne on this team anyway, and all Gagne has done so far is amass a -8 and put himself on LTIR. And Shelley is definitely overpaid, but hasn't really been hurting this team so far.
Its not about whether Gagne would fit or not, or if he is healthy. We took on a 3 year cap hit of 1.7 million dollars (and dont say TB needed cap space as we had already taken Meszaros at 4 million). I would have preferred to just trade Gagne for a 4th, or for future considerations. I would have preferred trade him with a 4th for cap space (like the JR to LA deal). I accepted that Gagne was going to be a cap causality.

Shelley has played alright, but it sucks not being able to roll 4 lines like we did last year. I dont purely blame Holmgren for Shelley, I just wish the enforcer role in the NHL would die, its so useless and unneeded. If no one had "Heavies" no one else would need them. its like a ****ing cold war

And Walker isnt an unknown, he is a horrible NHL player who is only in the NHL because he is Tough. There is a reason Hawks fans rejoiced when he signed with TB, and a reason TB fans rejoiced when he was traded to us. He sucks and is signed for 2 more years after this one at 1.7 million, when he is worth about 600k and should be in the AHL.


Last edited by HoverCarle*: 11-26-2010 at 06:19 AM.
HoverCarle* is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 06:24 AM
  #81
chaosof99*
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 16,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovercraft View Post
I don't despise Holmgren, but he does have big flaws and anyone who cant see that is fooling themselves.
I believe you are mistaken here. It's not that I'm saying that Holmgren doesn't have flaws. I've readily declared in this thread that Holmgren has done some stupid ****.

What I'm doing here is refuting and standing up to people like Jester. It's not that I don't see any flaws, it's that all they see is flaws. As someone else said, they are the glass-half-full kind of person, except that you could put a full glass in front of them and they'd complain about the glass not being filled to the brim.

All I ever see from those people his complaints about how the team could be better and this and that minor problem that the team is facing or may face in the future, never being once appreciative of fact that the team finished last only a couple of years and has vastly improved since.

That's why there's a thread called "I love this team" and it's filled with *****ing and moaning. The second post in this ******* thread is already about how the 04 team was better than this one. Give me a ****ing break already.

chaosof99* is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 06:33 AM
  #82
HoverCarle*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to HoverCarle*
Yeah well its true that every Gm has flaws. I have no idea who could replace Holmgren at this moment.

This is my favorite Holmgren tale of crap:

Starts off in the off season. He signs Jones to a 2 year 2.75 million per deal, way more than he is/was worth. The trades a first for Eminger.

A couple of months later Briere and Jones are both on the LTIR, Holmgren not really understanding that they will come back at some point trades Eminger for Carle (adding over 2 million $, not that the trade value was bad) and trades for Alberts, adding even more back.

Briere and Jones come back, as predicted, and he is forced to waive Metropolit and Vaananen just to get them under the cap by a smidge.

This smidge is so small that in order to call up Syvret when Timonen gets the flu, he has to send Giroux to the AHL. Then to make himself more cap space, instead of ditching Jones and using Syvret (who played better) he trades Upshall and a 2nd for Carcillo (only clearing 350k).

This still leaves us with little to no wiggle room for injuries, that for the last 2 games of the year he had to find a CBA loophole to sign 2 college UFAs to try out contracts who are both in the ECHL now.
http://hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=81068
http://hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=93658

That is the worst streak of moves Holmgren has done by far. (like I said Carle trade was good value, but it caused all the rest of the cap **** storm for the rest of the year

HoverCarle* is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 06:59 AM
  #83
chaosof99*
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 16,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovercraft View Post
Yeah well its true that every Gm has flaws. I have no idea who could replace Holmgren at this moment.

This is my favorite Holmgren tale of crap:

Starts off in the off season. He signs Jones to a 2 year 2.75 million per deal, way more than he is/was worth. The trades a first for Eminger.

A couple of months later Briere and Jones are both on the LTIR, Holmgren not really understanding that they will come back at some point trades Eminger for Carle (adding over 2 million $, not that the trade value was bad) and trades for Alberts, adding even more back.

Briere and Jones come back, as predicted, and he is forced to waive Metropolit and Vaananen just to get them under the cap by a smidge.

This smidge is so small that in order to call up Syvret when Timonen gets the flu, he has to send Giroux to the AHL. Then to make himself more cap space, instead of ditching Jones and using Syvret (who played better) he trades Upshall and a 2nd for Carcillo (only clearing 350k).

This still leaves us with little to no wiggle room for injuries, that for the last 2 games of the year he had to find a CBA loophole to sign 2 college UFAs to try out contracts who are both in the ECHL now.
http://hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=81068
http://hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=93658

That is the worst streak of moves Holmgren has done by far. (like I said Carle trade was good value, but it caused all the rest of the cap **** storm for the rest of the year
Sorry, but half of that is BS.

Eminger simply didn't work out. Jones and Briere being on LTIR didn't have anything to do with it. I remember quite clearly that Eminger was pretty bad on this team, and particularly in the game against Ottawa before he traded he was horrendous. It's still stuck in my head.

But this is in my opinion a "have your cake and eat it too" situation. You said yourself that it is lucky that Bobrovsky showed dividends way earlier than expected. You can equally chalk up the fact that Eminger didn't show what Holmgren hoped he would after the trade to luck just as well. I just do not get how when one prospect works out it's luck, and when another hopeful player doesn't it's all on Holmgren.

Getting rid of Eminger was a good thing and getting back Carle was great. That the room to make this move ate into the space created from Briere and Jones being on LTIR doesn't detract from it being a good move.

And I still stand by my opinion that Alberts was a good acquisition for us. He added some needed grit and toughness on the blue line, which the team didn't have. He played well here, though his reputation got a little bit worse since then.

I liked Väänänen too, but something had to give. He simply was the odd man out because he didn't necessarily offer anything the rest of the defense didn't provide. Pretty much the same with Metro. I do agree though that it might have been better to part with Jones then and there.

Giroux only missed a single game from that incident you are talking about, so I really have no clue what the big complaint there is.


Basically, this entire tirade can be summed up in "he should have traded Jones" and I agree with that. However, it doesn't change that Holmgren is a good GM and that the team has become successful under his watch and largely because of his moves.

What I don't see is the point of bringing all this up in a thread entitled "I love this team".


Last edited by chaosof99*: 11-26-2010 at 07:05 AM.
chaosof99* is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 07:01 AM
  #84
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovercraft View Post
Tallon gets credit, which is why Florida hired him to build them a new team, but he is just like Holmgren. Great eye for talent, piss poor cap management. Imagine if Huet hadnt gone overseas? Chicago would have lost Sharp or Bolland too.

I don't despise Holmgren, but he does have big flaws and anyone who cant see that is fooling themselves. I am very thankful for this team, and I give Holmgren credit for this great team.

And as I have said on many occasions, his cap management seems to be getting better (Giroux, Carter). If he smartens up and puts Walker in the AHL when hes healthy, I will give him huge props. Howver judging by Gauthier and Jones, he will **** us over with Walker too
2011-12
Hartnell (4.20) - Briere (6.50) - Leino (TBD)
vanRiemsdyk (1.65) - Richards (5.75) - Nodl (TBD)
Carter (5.27) - Giroux (3.75) - Wellwood (0.58)
Powe (TBD) - Betts (0.70) - Shelley (1.10)

Pronger (4.92) - Carle (3.44)
Timonen (6.33) - Coburn (3.20)
Meszaros (4.00) - Bartulis (0.60)

Bobrovsky (1.75)
Leighton (1.55)

TOTAL: 55.29
CAP: 59.40
SPACE: 4.11
NEED CONTRACTS: Leino, Nodl, Powe
PROBABLY RETAINED: Leino, Nodl, Powe

2012-13
Hartnell (4.20) - Briere (6.50) - Leino (TBD)
vanRiemsdyk (TBD) - Richards (5.75) - Nodl (TBD)
Carter (5.27) - Giroux (3.75) - Wellwood (0.58)
Powe (TBD) - Betts (TBD) - Shelley (1.10)

Pronger (4.92) - Carle (TBD)
Timonen (6.33) - Coburn (TBD)
Meszaros (4.00) - Bartulis (0.60)

Bobrovsky (1.75)
Leighton (TBD)

TOTAL: 45.55
CAP: 59.40
SPACE: 13.85
NEED CONTRACTS: vanRiemsdyk, Betts, Carle, Coburn, Leighton, (Leino, Nodl, Powe)
PROBABLY RETAINED: vanRiemsdyk, Betts, Carle/Coburn, (Leino, Nodl, Powe)

2013-14
Hartnell (TBD) - Briere (6.50) - Leino (TBD)
vanRiemsdyk (TBD) - Richards (5.75) - Nodl (TBD)
Carter (5.27) - Giroux (3.75) - Wellwood (TBD)
Powe (TBD) - Betts (0.70) - Shelley (TBD)

Pronger (4.92) - PROSPECT
Timonen (6.33) - Carle/Coburn (TBD)
Meszaros (4.00) - Bartulis (TBD)

Bobrovsky (TBD)
GOALIE

TOTAL: 30.89
CAP: 59.40
SPACE: 29.51 (-vanRiemsdyk, Betts, Carle/Coburn, Leino, Nodl, Powe + GOALIE + PROSPECT)
NEED CONTRACTS: Bartulis, Bobrovsky, Wellwood, Hartnell, Timonen
PROBABLY RETAINED: Bobrovsky, Wellwood

2014-15
xxxxxxxxxx - Briere - Leino (maybe out of contract)
vanRiemsdyk - Richards - Nodl
Carter - Giroux - Wellwood
xxxxxxxxxx - xxxxxxxxxxx - xxxxxxxxxxx

Pronger - Carle/Coburn
Meszaros - xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx - xxxxxxxxxx

Bobrovsky
xxxxxxxxxx

NEED CONTRACTS: Giroux, Meszaros

2015-16: Goodbye Briere

People who complain about Holmgren's cap management either:

A) Can't do math.
B) Are attached to specific players that fall victim to Holmgren's cap.
C) Are scared (aka would rather live cautiously even if it hurts their chances).
D) Never bothered to look, just assumed, or are sheep following Jester's herd.

The Flyers are in a good position cap wise.

If we really wanted to, we could almost keep our current top 9 forwards (Wellwood over Zherdev) for the next three seasons with relative ease, not to mention our blueline, which MIGHT only lose Carle, who can probably be replaced by one of our MANY defensive prospects.

I find it absolutely insane that people still complain about Holmgren's "cap management" like somehow those that believe he is doing a good job are being tricked by the devil.


Last edited by CS: 11-26-2010 at 07:07 AM.
CS is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 07:25 AM
  #85
HoverCarle*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to HoverCarle*
Chaos I didnt even rag on the Eminger trade here, or the Alberts trade. I was hopeful when we first got Eminger(Hoped for another Coburn), and the Alberts trade was fine, I was just showing that he didnt understand LTIR since he added so much $$ to put us over the cap. also as I said TWICE in my post the Carle trade was great value wise, but the cap implications were dire and showed a lack of foresight on Holmgren's part.

and why are we talking about it in this thread? Maybe you should ask yourself that question

Quote:
P.S.: I also enjoy that this basically flies into the face of the people who were calling for Holmgren's decapitation during the off-season.

And Chris I never said we are in a bad position cap wise right now, I am usually on the trade board with you defending the flyers cap space for next year, especially without Walker


Last edited by HoverCarle*: 11-26-2010 at 07:30 AM.
HoverCarle* is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 07:35 AM
  #86
chaosof99*
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 16,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovercraft View Post
and why are we talking about it in this thread? Maybe you should ask yourself that question
The only reason I mentioned this was because I was one of the few people who was pleading with my fellow posters on this board to at least give this team a chance to play a few games before going out and readying a noose for Holmgren.

This doom and gloom **** has been going on for a whole lot longer than this thread alone, you know, and it had already seeped into this thread before I made that statement and of course perpetrated by the usual suspects. Not to mention that it escalated afterwards without my statement being cited for it. Could have also been a lot easier if people would just accept that the team is doing good, rather than still cling to attempts of getting the GM of a first place team fired.

Yeah, I'm terribly sorry for feeling vindicated as the team actually performs when they are given a chance, rather than prematurely condemning it without a game played in the season.

chaosof99* is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 07:55 AM
  #87
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovercraft View Post
Chaos I didnt even rag on the Eminger trade here, or the Alberts trade. I was hopeful when we first got Eminger(Hoped for another Coburn), and the Alberts trade was fine, I was just showing that he didnt understand LTIR since he added so much $$ to put us over the cap. also as I said TWICE in my post the Carle trade was great value wise, but the cap implications were dire and showed a lack of foresight on Holmgren's part.

and why are we talking about it in this thread? Maybe you should ask yourself that question
Honestly, not pulling the trigger on Eminger at that point in the game is luck. PMD was a desperate need, Eminger was a young PMD from the 1st round, and he was available. Washington caught us. Every GM gets caught sometime.

The fact that Eminger didn't work out is what caused the desperation and overpayment to get Carle.

If our hindsight is perfect, and we don't make that trade, in theory our team looks like this:

Hartnell - Briere - Leino
vanRiemsdyk - Richards - Nodl
Carter - Giroux - Downie
Powe - Betts - Shelley

Pronger - Carlson
Timonen - Coburn
Meszaros - O'Donnell

Bobrovsky
Boucher

Then again that's in theory. Proving that our team would look like that stretches the limits of causality. Having dealt with causality enough in college, I promise that I'm not about to get into discussion about it here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovercraft View Post
And Chris I never said we are in a bad position cap wise right now, I am usually on the trade board with you defending the flyers cap space for next year, especially without Walker
I know you are. It wasn't a jab at you in particular even though I quoted you.

I think there's a distinct difference between our cap situation long-term and the little issues that Holmgren creates for himself such as the Carle/Briere situation leading to the movement of Upshall or the Randy Jones debacle.

I think Holmgren sometimes overjudges our short-term situation at times, but long-term he is seemingly a very strong capologist long-term.

CS is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 08:44 AM
  #88
FlyHigh
Registered User
 
FlyHigh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 28,156
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to FlyHigh Send a message via MSN to FlyHigh
People defending the Eminger trade...?

I used to be one of you before I slammed my head in the door and realized that it was just absolutely retarded. I mean, Eminger was already on the fast track to being a bust before we made that deal and giving up the 1st for him was idiotic.

I'm personally not as upset on the Downie thing simply because we didn't know when/if this guy was ever going to mature and we grabbed Carle who's a decent top-4 player and can log minutes, but defending the Eminger trade just doesn't make sense considering that this guy is a barely an NHLer.

The other thing is that Bobrovsky currently has a .925 and is on pace for 61 games. Anyone who expects him to maintain that performance, play that many games, and be fresh for the POs has another thing coming. At some point, this team is going to need to rely fairly heavily on Boosh/Leighton which is not a thing I'm comfortable with.

FlyHigh is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 08:46 AM
  #89
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 109,269
vCash: 5775
The biggest issue with the Eminger trade was how Holmgren went about doing it. It was completely unnecessary to give up a 1st round draft pick for him, because there was a very, very good chance the Capitals weren't even going to qualify his contract. They could have had him without trading for him, or at the very least, giving him an offer sheet. Carlson is a stud now, and if he goes on to be a superstar, that's someone who should have been doing it for us, and would have made a few more decisions quite a bit easier.


I think some people here need to realize what was made painfully obvious last year - the Stanley Cup isn't won in November.

GKJ is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 09:56 AM
  #90
DUHockey9
Registered User
 
DUHockey9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hogwarts
Country: United States
Posts: 4,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chaosof99 View Post
This statement does make absolutely no sense. Please tell me a metric to judge the quality of the moves by a hockey GM, other than the performance of his team after the moves were completed.
How is it BS? The metric by which you look at a move should be within the context of that move itself, not the big picture that is the team. Everyone knew this team was awesome, does that mean every move that happened is just as awesome?

I've used this car analogy before. If you buy some awesome car, but pay 10k over sticker price is that good? The end result is...you have an awesome car (we have an awesome team), but you paid 10k over sticker price. That's just stupid.

The end doesn't justify the means.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chaosof99 View Post
Sorry, but half of that is BS.

Eminger simply didn't work out. Jones and Briere being on LTIR didn't have anything to do with it. I remember quite clearly that Eminger was pretty bad on this team, and particularly in the game against Ottawa before he traded he was horrendous. It's still stuck in my head.

But this is in my opinion a "have your cake and eat it too" situation. You said yourself that it is lucky that Bobrovsky showed dividends way earlier than expected. You can equally chalk up the fact that Eminger didn't show what Holmgren hoped he would after the trade to luck just as well. I just do not get how when one prospect works out it's luck, and when another hopeful player doesn't it's all on Holmgren.

Getting rid of Eminger was a good thing and getting back Carle was great. That the room to make this move ate into the space created from Briere and Jones being on LTIR doesn't detract from it being a good move.

And I still stand by my opinion that Alberts was a good acquisition for us. He added some needed grit and toughness on the blue line, which the team didn't have. He played well here, though his reputation got a little bit worse since then.

I liked Väänänen too, but something had to give. He simply was the odd man out because he didn't necessarily offer anything the rest of the defense didn't provide. Pretty much the same with Metro. I do agree though that it might have been better to part with Jones then and there.

Giroux only missed a single game from that incident you are talking about, so I really have no clue what the big complaint there is.


Basically, this entire tirade can be summed up in "he should have traded Jones" and I agree with that. However, it doesn't change that Holmgren is a good GM and that the team has become successful under his watch and largely because of his moves.

What I don't see is the point of bringing all this up in a thread entitled "I love this team".
I fail to see how that is BS either.

Exclude the Eminger deal altogether, what about that entire sequence made sense?

-Overpay horribly for Jones
-place a ton of salary on LTIR
-add a ton of salary
-LTIR salary comes back
-waive some players to make it under
-have zero space to even dress 6 d-men when one gets the fly
-send down Giroux
-Overpay for Dan Carcillo because you're that desperate for ~300k in savings so you can stop sending down Claude Giroux
-Still have such little cap space that you have to dress guys off the street...down the stretch...when you're trying to make the playoffs

How is that BS? It is what happened.

DUHockey9 is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 10:51 AM
  #91
Hockeypete49
How you like me now!
 
Hockeypete49's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Jersey
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
2011-12
Hartnell (4.20) - Briere (6.50) - Leino (TBD)
vanRiemsdyk (1.65) - Richards (5.75) - Nodl (TBD)
Carter (5.27) - Giroux (3.75) - Wellwood (0.58)
Powe (TBD) - Betts (0.70) - Shelley (1.10)

Pronger (4.92) - Carle (3.44)
Timonen (6.33) - Coburn (3.20)
Meszaros (4.00) - Bartulis (0.60)

Bobrovsky (1.75)
Leighton (1.55)

TOTAL: 55.29
CAP: 59.40
SPACE: 4.11
NEED CONTRACTS: Leino, Nodl, Powe
PROBABLY RETAINED: Leino, Nodl, Powe

2012-13
Hartnell (4.20) - Briere (6.50) - Leino (TBD)
vanRiemsdyk (TBD) - Richards (5.75) - Nodl (TBD)
Carter (5.27) - Giroux (3.75) - Wellwood (0.58)
Powe (TBD) - Betts (TBD) - Shelley (1.10)

Pronger (4.92) - Carle (TBD)
Timonen (6.33) - Coburn (TBD)
Meszaros (4.00) - Bartulis (0.60)

Bobrovsky (1.75)
Leighton (TBD)

TOTAL: 45.55
CAP: 59.40
SPACE: 13.85
NEED CONTRACTS: vanRiemsdyk, Betts, Carle, Coburn, Leighton, (Leino, Nodl, Powe)
PROBABLY RETAINED: vanRiemsdyk, Betts, Carle/Coburn, (Leino, Nodl, Powe)

2013-14
Hartnell (TBD) - Briere (6.50) - Leino (TBD)
vanRiemsdyk (TBD) - Richards (5.75) - Nodl (TBD)
Carter (5.27) - Giroux (3.75) - Wellwood (TBD)
Powe (TBD) - Betts (0.70) - Shelley (TBD)

Pronger (4.92) - PROSPECT
Timonen (6.33) - Carle/Coburn (TBD)
Meszaros (4.00) - Bartulis (TBD)

Bobrovsky (TBD)
GOALIE

TOTAL: 30.89
CAP: 59.40
SPACE: 29.51 (-vanRiemsdyk, Betts, Carle/Coburn, Leino, Nodl, Powe + GOALIE + PROSPECT)
NEED CONTRACTS: Bartulis, Bobrovsky, Wellwood, Hartnell, Timonen
PROBABLY RETAINED: Bobrovsky, Wellwood

2014-15
xxxxxxxxxx - Briere - Leino (maybe out of contract)
vanRiemsdyk - Richards - Nodl
Carter - Giroux - Wellwood
xxxxxxxxxx - xxxxxxxxxxx - xxxxxxxxxxx

Pronger - Carle/Coburn
Meszaros - xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx - xxxxxxxxxx

Bobrovsky
xxxxxxxxxx

NEED CONTRACTS: Giroux, Meszaros

2015-16: Goodbye Briere

People who complain about Holmgren's cap management either:

A) Can't do math.
B) Are attached to specific players that fall victim to Holmgren's cap.
C) Are scared (aka would rather live cautiously even if it hurts their chances).
D) Never bothered to look, just assumed, or are sheep following Jester's herd.

The Flyers are in a good position cap wise.

If we really wanted to, we could almost keep our current top 9 forwards (Wellwood over Zherdev) for the next three seasons with relative ease, not to mention our blueline, which MIGHT only lose Carle, who can probably be replaced by one of our MANY defensive prospects.

I find it absolutely insane that people still complain about Holmgren's "cap management" like somehow those that believe he is doing a good job are being tricked by the devil.
Well said Chris. Nice piece on our prospects.

Hockeypete49 is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 10:55 AM
  #92
Hockeypete49
How you like me now!
 
Hockeypete49's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Jersey
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
Wow, the leap of logic there is staggering. Downie was an attitude problem who needed getting rid of (I'm glad he's finally growing up a bit) and they threw Eminger in the package for Matt Carle - who is proving to be an excellent defenseman whether he's paired with Pronger, Coburn or whomever.

I'd do that trade again in a heartbeat any day of the week.
I was and am still a Downie fan. However I would do this trade again also.

Hockeypete49 is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 10:58 AM
  #93
Alchemy
Philadelphia Flyers
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 12,463
vCash: 500
Nice breakdown Chris.

I think this whole "He sucks at the cap" Crowd is non-sense. It's an overrated issue. The Flyers aren't in a situation like the Hawks were.

The only problem i have with Homer is how weak our prospect pool is.. Yes we have two good goalie prospects but after that look at how terrible our prospects are. The Eminger trade was the worst trade he has made. That was down right awful. He also overpays for what he is trying to get.

Alchemy is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 11:01 AM
  #94
chaosof99*
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 16,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DUHockey9 View Post
How is it BS? The metric by which you look at a move should be within the context of that move itself, not the big picture that is the team. Everyone knew this team was awesome, does that mean every move that happened is just as awesome?

I've used this car analogy before. If you buy some awesome car, but pay 10k over sticker price is that good? The end result is...you have an awesome car (we have an awesome team), but you paid 10k over sticker price. That's just stupid.

The end doesn't justify the means.
So the team is not part of the context? Interesting...

I'm sorry, but the performance of the team or the player involved in the move is necessarily the metric on which to judge that move and the team around it is also context for that move.

No, having a good team doesn't mean that every move you make will be just as good. However, it is patently absurd to focus on the bad moves made to the point of exclusivity in an effort to paint a skewed picture only to stroke one's ego. Yet this is what I observe in this very forum almost every day.

Holmgren has done a ton of fantastic moves for the Flyers, yet all I ever see brought up are the bad ones. And if there is ever a good move brought up, or good performance by the team that he has created, it's declared to be luck. It's confirmation bias to the nth degree.

I was also talking about "moves" as a collective, i.e. the performance of the general manager during his tenure, not necessarily every single move individually. The entirety of what Holmgren has done is necessarily reflected in the performance of the club itself.

Yet you are telling me that how a team plays doesn't show the job its General Manager did. Sorry, but that doesn't make any sense at all.



Quote:
Originally Posted by DUHockey9 View Post
I fail to see how that is BS either.

Exclude the Eminger deal altogether, what about that entire sequence made sense?

-Overpay horribly for Jones
-place a ton of salary on LTIR
-add a ton of salary
-LTIR salary comes back
-waive some players to make it under
-have zero space to even dress 6 d-men when one gets the fly
-send down Giroux
-Overpay for Dan Carcillo because you're that desperate for ~300k in savings so you can stop sending down Claude Giroux
-Still have such little cap space that you have to dress guys off the street...down the stretch...when you're trying to make the playoffs

How is that BS? It is what happened.
You answered your own question. You are excluding things and simplifying things for no reason and paint a skewed picture. You talk about placing salary on LTIR as if that is a deliberate move. You mention "add a ton of salary" without naming the players who are represented in that salary.

You mention things that have virtually 0 impact and you mention things out of order. Giroux missed the March 1st game, but he played on March 3rd and every game after that. The Carcillo trade happened March 4th.


However, all of this is a moot point because what people don't seem to get is that I'm talking about Holmgren being a good GM because of his track record of the whole of his stay with this team as the GM. You can't just pick and choose whatever you want out of that.

Now tell me what metric is there to use to judge the performance of a General Manager, other than the what the team he manages accomplishes?

chaosof99* is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 11:03 AM
  #95
Hockeypete49
How you like me now!
 
Hockeypete49's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Jersey
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbage Goal View Post
We shouldn't have even gotten past the second round last year and the Habs were like the best possible matchup for us in the third. Last year's playoffs were entirely about luck for us. We gained our best winger in Gagne and the Bruins lost their best forward in Krejci in the span of one game. If that doesn't happen then there's no doubt in my mind that we don't come back from 0-3.
"If" my Aunt had balls she would be my Uncle. You are good at history lessons. Let me know when you can predict the future.
PS I would rather be lucky than good.

Hockeypete49 is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 11:16 AM
  #96
1865
Registered User
 
1865's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chester, UK
Country: England
Posts: 9,141
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by DUHockey9 View Post
You're copping out by pointing at the product and saying "look how good we are". That isn't the tell all of whether or not someone is doing a great job.
It isn't?! Well then, what on earth possibly could be?

A GM's job is to put as competitive an outfit on the ice as possible. Holmgren has put together arguably the best team in the NHL.

1865 is online now  
Old
11-26-2010, 12:12 PM
  #97
jb**
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Planet Lovetron
Country: Italy
Posts: 8,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chaosof99 View Post
Sorry, but half of that is BS.

Eminger simply didn't work out. Jones and Briere being on LTIR didn't have anything to do with it. I remember quite clearly that Eminger was pretty bad on this team, and particularly in the game against Ottawa before he traded he was horrendous. It's still stuck in my head.

But this is in my opinion a "have your cake and eat it too" situation. You said yourself that it is lucky that Bobrovsky showed dividends way earlier than expected. You can equally chalk up the fact that Eminger didn't show what Holmgren hoped he would after the trade to luck just as well. I just do not get how when one prospect works out it's luck, and when another hopeful player doesn't it's all on Holmgren.

Getting rid of Eminger was a good thing and getting back Carle was great. That the room to make this move ate into the space created from Briere and Jones being on LTIR doesn't detract from it being a good move.

And I still stand by my opinion that Alberts was a good acquisition for us. He added some needed grit and toughness on the blue line, which the team didn't have. He played well here, though his reputation got a little bit worse since then.

I liked Väänänen too, but something had to give. He simply was the odd man out because he didn't necessarily offer anything the rest of the defense didn't provide. Pretty much the same with Metro. I do agree though that it might have been better to part with Jones then and there.

Giroux only missed a single game from that incident you are talking about, so I really have no clue what the big complaint there is.


Basically, this entire tirade can be summed up in "he should have traded Jones" and I agree with that. However, it doesn't change that Holmgren is a good GM and that the team has become successful under his watch and largely because of his moves.
What I don't see is the point of bringing all this up in a thread entitled "I love this team".
he played what a whopping 12 games. He was given a real chance. also the moves made by the guy before him.

jb** is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 12:12 PM
  #98
Larry44
FlyersTankNation
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by harakiri View Post
Nice breakdown Chris.

I think this whole "He sucks at the cap" Crowd is non-sense. It's an overrated issue. The Flyers aren't in a situation like the Hawks were.

The only problem i have with Homer is how weak our prospect pool is.. Yes we have two good goalie prospects but after that look at how terrible our prospects are. The Eminger trade was the worst trade he has made. That was down right awful. He also overpays for what he is trying to get.
Again, you have to look at the big picture. Does Homer trade draft picks? Yes. Does he get proven NHL player for them? Almost all the time.

And the cupboards are not as bare as you think.

We've got great goalie prospects in Bobrovsky and Ericksson.

On D, we've got Bartulis, Gustafsson, Marshall and Bourdon who are legitimate prospects to be NHL players. But we've also got two star veteran studs (Pronger and Kimmo) signed to long term deals, and three excellent Dmen who are about 25 too, so it's not all greybeards back there.

At forward, we've got a whole bunch of young forwards so it's not like we're in desperate shape to replace them all.

The top 6 is overflowing for the next few years (Richards, Carter, Giroux, JVR, Briere, Leino, Hartnell). Add to that young guys like Powe and Carcillo and Nodl who can play in the top 9 and we really only need depth players for the next three or four years.

Eh, voila. Wellwood, Testwuide, Holmstrom, Kalinski are ready or almost ready to fill in depth roles now. Guys like Ranford and Chaput in Jr. will provide depth in the out years.

True, we don't have superstars on the farm, but I don't regret trading first rounders for Pronger, or Downie for Carle, or a second for Meszaros. Those deals are part of the reason the team is so good now.

Larry44 is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 12:42 PM
  #99
rban*
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,894
vCash: 500
One ignored aspect of this team: other than O'Donnell, all other Dmen have offensive skills.

Pronger has scored over 10 goals before. Timo and Coburn did so one year. So did Carle, and Meszaros hit 9 goals also.

Not saying that all 5 will generate mucho goals/points this season.. but they all have the ability to feed the puck out of their zone to the forwards and help breakouts.

When you have three strong offensive lines, plus five Dmen capable of feeding that offense the puck....WOW !!

Anyone surprised that this team is generating enormous goals this season??

Another thing every team playing Flyers have to be very worried about is shorties. When you have good defensemen who can also find streaking forwards....well, lemme put it this way:

I'm almost willing to eat my hat if Flyers don't score the mazimum number of SH goals this season, and by a huge margin.

rban* is offline  
Old
11-26-2010, 01:32 PM
  #100
HoverCarle*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to HoverCarle*
Chaos, the Holmgren haters never said we were going to be a bad team this year, just that we could have been even better. Thats what you need to realize

Quote:
One ignored aspect of this team: other than O'Donnell, all other Dmen have offensive skills.

Pronger has scored over 10 goals before. Timo and Coburn did so one year. So did Carle, and Meszaros hit 9 goals also.

Not saying that all 5 will generate mucho goals/points this season.. but they all have the ability to feed the puck out of their zone to the forwards and help breakouts.

When you have three strong offensive lines, plus five Dmen capable of feeding that offense the puck....WOW !!

Anyone surprised that this team is generating enormous goals this season??
.
thats why I love Meszaros. Good offense and great hitting

HoverCarle* is offline  
Closed Thread

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 11:45 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.