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

Flyers draft selection #196 -- Joacim Eriksson -- G -- Brynas Jr/Sweden

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-07-2012, 06:03 PM
  #51
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,565
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
That is clearly not what I said. Here all the evidence, (going undrafted and unsigned, passed up for national teams, etc) points to the fact that they were right. If someone else signed him and he was making a move to NA or was drafted or something showing at least anything that they made a mistake would be a good argument for you, but that hasn't happened. So how have they made a mistake? In what ways has this move negatively affected this team?
Surely, no players are ignored by organizations and then come out of nowhere to have an impact in the NHL.

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
Beef Invictus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 06:06 PM
  #52
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,997
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
That's fine but this is once again (I think I had this argument when this first happened ) when I bring up that there are paid professionals scouting this kid. Not fans watching YouTube clips and reading Bill Meltzer's tweets. I know everyone on here is an expert an knows at least as much as the pros, but I will defer to the organization and the other 29 that passed on him. Sure, they could be mistaken, but judging by the fact that he went undrafted, then unsigned, and passed up for national teams, that has to at least give credence to the fact that they know what they are doing here. Not proof positive but at this point it is all we have because who knows how good he will be.
30 organizations passed on Matt Read, on Erik Gustafsson, on Sergei Bobrovsky...

Why is it so hard to believe 30 organizations could stupidly pass on Eriksson after one bad year only for him to be a very relevant and important NHLer?




Pretend for a second the Flyers didn't ever draft him.

Pretend, just like Bobrovsky, he'd been sitting overseas, developing, and waiting for an NHL team not to snatch him up.

Knowing what you know about Bryzgalov's contract in potential disarray, that the fall-out from it could cost us Bobrovsky, and that Hovinen, as a much older goalie, has only had two really strong seasons in his career, can you really argue against going after and attempting to sign a 21-year-old dominant goalie in the third highest league in the world who has been pretty much dominant almost throughout his career?

Not going after Eriksson is stupid.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 06:07 PM
  #53
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,422
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
Surely, no players are ignored by organizations and then come out of nowhere to have an impact in the NHL.
And like I said, that very well may happen. But that isn't a reason to sign every player that passes through this organization. Again, how has this negatively affected this team or at very least, on what are you basing your argument that they made a mistake?

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 06:08 PM
  #54
mirimon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Wrong Town
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
That's fine but this is once again (I think I had this argument when this first happened ) when I bring up that there are paid professionals scouting this kid. Not fans watching YouTube clips and reading Bill Meltzer's tweets. I know everyone on here is an expert an knows at least as much as the pros, but I will defer to the organization and the other 29 that passed on him. Sure, they could be mistaken, but judging by the fact that he went undrafted, then unsigned, and passed up for national teams, that has to at least give credence to the fact that they know what they are doing here. Not proof positive but at this point it is all we have because who knows how good he will be.
I think the fact that all other teams passed on him in the draft this past summer could have its explanation in the good-old-boys club that the NHL GMs all are part of. They rarely **** with each other, and the situation was a bit special with the new agreement between the NHL and the SEL (and the Finnish league as well, iirc) was finalized after most teams had done most of their preparations for the next season regarding prospects. I think there were a few teams who had some European talent that went unsigned all of a sudden. Or maybe I'm just wearing my tin-foil hat. I also wouldn't be all that surprised if we can somehow pick Hyka with a 4th round pick this year...

Eriksson has also been selected for the national team previously this season. It was for the tournament in Russia, which is traditionally the tournament where we send our weakest/youngest team (those not invited get a longer Christmas break, and, well... don't have to go to Russia in mid-December...) but still. I came off a bit too pessimistic about him in my previous post perhaps, but I think that Eriksson could be the 2nd or 3rd goalie for Sweden in the World Championship when all is said and done. A lot of it depends on what will happen in the NHL, and if the guys there are interested in playing in that tournament.

mirimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 06:10 PM
  #55
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,565
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
And like I said, that very well may happen. But that isn't a reason to sign every player that passes through this organization. Again, how has this negatively affected this team or at very least, on what are you basing your argument that they made a mistake?
He's showing loads of potential. How would it hurt the organization to give him a contract slot? How is playing it safe and keeping other teams from having the opportunity to steal him if he breaks out a bad thing?

Beef Invictus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 06:13 PM
  #56
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,422
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
30 organizations passed on Matt Read, on Erik Gustafsson, on Sergei Bobrovsky...

Why is it so hard to believe 30 organizations could stupidly pass on Eriksson after one bad year only for him to be a very relevant and important NHLer?
It isn't hard to believe. The problem is that it is not a guarantee yet you are treating it like it is. I have said he may turn out to be amazing in the NHL. But he also may never play a game. The fact that teams keep passing on him/showing no interest/not getting chosen for national teams leads me to believe they have not made a mistake. If he was scooped up right away or drafted or signed or tearing it up on the national level then I'd be right there with you. But again, that isn't happening. So what are we upset about?

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 06:16 PM
  #57
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,997
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
It isn't hard to believe. The problem is that it is not a guarantee yet you are treating it like it is. I have said he may turn out to be amazing in the NHL. But he also may never play a game. The fact that teams keep passing on him/showing no interest/not getting chosen for national teams leads me to believe they have not made a mistake. If he was scooped up right away or drafted or signed or tearing it up on the national level then I'd be right there with you. But again, that isn't happening. So what are we upset about?
Nothing is ever a guarantee in this game.

But not putting the odds in your favor by signing him is ****ING stupid. I hope that answers your last question.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 06:16 PM
  #58
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,422
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by mirimon View Post
I think the fact that all other teams passed on him in the draft this past summer could have its explanation in the good-old-boys club that the NHL GMs all are part of. They rarely **** with each other, and the situation was a bit special with the new agreement between the NHL and the SEL (and the Finnish league as well, iirc) was finalized after most teams had done most of their preparations for the next season regarding prospects. I think there were a few teams who had some European talent that went unsigned all of a sudden. Or maybe I'm just wearing my tin-foil hat. I also wouldn't be all that surprised if we can somehow pick Hyka with a 4th round pick this year...

Eriksson has also been selected for the national team previously this season. It was for the tournament in Russia, which is traditionally the tournament where we send our weakest/youngest team (those not invited get a longer Christmas break, and, well... don't have to go to Russia in mid-December...) but still. I came off a bit too pessimistic about him in my previous post perhaps, but I think that Eriksson could be the 2nd or 3rd goalie for Sweden in the World Championship when all is said and done. A lot of it depends on what will happen in the NHL, and if the guys there are interested in playing in that tournament.
Your opinion I would consider more valid because I would assume you see him on a more frequent basis being from Sweden. I just don't like people arguing so vehemently about a guy that they probably never seen outside of a youtube clip, or have seen very limitedly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
He's showing loads of potential. How would it hurt the organization to give him a contract slot? How is playing it safe and keeping other teams from having the opportunity to steal him if he breaks out a bad thing?
That's fine but again, just because you see the potential from looking at stats and reading Bill Meltzer's tweets and seeing YouTube clips, doesn't mean he has that potential. This is where I will defer to the experts. I know that is a crazy notion because the Flyers have a terrible track record with young players recently.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 08:37 PM
  #59
BobbyClarkeFan16
Registered User
 
BobbyClarkeFan16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,895
vCash: 500
I know some people laugh at this, but I managed to snag a job as a part time scout for Central Scouting Bureau just under six years ago. One of the things that I can tell with regards to scouting players is that there are certain characteristics you look for in players to determine whether or not they'll be players at the NHL level. With regards to Eriksson, he fits every criteria you look for in a goaltender to play at the NHL level.

First thing that everyone looks at is physical fitness level. Eriksson is probably one of the top five conditioned hockey players in Europe. Not goaltender, but hockey player in general. His physical fitness level is off the chart. He's incredibly strong, he's flexible and more important, he has a low body fat percentage and a very high lean mass percentage (in his draft year, his body fat percentage was 7% - it's around 4 to 5% right now).

Second thing everyone looks at with regards to goaltenders is their hand to eye co-ordination/reflexes. Once again, Eriksson ranked very high with regards to hand to eye co-ordination/reflexes. His glove hand was incredibly accurate and his sight is pratically impeccable.

Third thing you want from a goaltender is lateral movement. In terms of lateral movement, only one goaltender from Eriksson's draft year had better lateral movement and that was Jacob Markstrom. Eriksson ranked ahead of goalies like Chet Pickard, Thomas McCollum, Jake Allen, Tyler Beskorowany, Peter Delmas, Michael Hutchinson, Marco Cousineau, Brayden Holtby, Harri Sateri, etc.......

The next thing you want from a goaltender is their positional play. Do they square up well against the puck? How deep in their crease do they play? If they play a butterfly style, how quick are they to get back on their feet, etc.......What hurt Eriksson at the time was that he didn't square up well against the puck and he played too deep in his crease. That was attributed to the European game, but it's something that can be worked on.

The fifth thing scouts look at with regards to goaltenders is how well they handle the puck. Once again, Eriksson didn't fare so well in this category. He had improved by the time the draft rolled around, but he didn't improve significantly. That was one thing that he needed to work on and from video I've seen since his draft year, it has improved. He'll never be Martin Brodeur, but he has improved to the point where he's competent at handling the puck.

The one big intangible that couldn't be answered at the time, which also affected his draft rating, was how he handled adversity. Part of the problem was that Eriksson never faced any sort of adversity in his career. He always put up dominant numbers in every league he ever played in. Once again, scouts saw that as a negative. The other issue scouts had was that Eriksson had stated he wanted to remain in Sweden for two years after his draft year and then he wanted to come over to North America. He wasn't ready to come over after two years and scouts tried to tell him to stay in Sweden until he was 23/24. By then, he would have played in the SEL for at least a season or two and it could have been determined whether or not he was ready.

After his first season in the SEL, the Flyers didn't offer a contract. Part of it was because Neil Little felt that Eriksson wouldn't be able to rebound. He was never given the opportunity to rebound from the poor season. As well, Little became infatuated with Hovinen in Finland. Little saw a big goaltender who put up great numbers in the Finnish Elite League and was gushing over Hovinen's ability.

Now that Eriksson has had a year to get his game together at the SEL level, he's putting up numbers that were similar to Henrik Lundqvist (actually, in their 22nd year, Eriksson's numbers are better than Lundqvist's were at the same time).

I know hindsight is always 20/20, but Eriksson was what most would consider a definite player. At the very worst, you had a very good back up goaltender in the NHL and best case scenario is that he's going to be a number one. That's the kind of player you don't give up on after one poor season.

EDIT: One other reason why Eriksson went lower than others was simply due to the fact that his draft year, he played in only 28 games his draft year. The goaltenders who were drafted ahead of Eriksson played at least double the number of games he played. The other thing I should mention is that Eriksson is a good skating goaltender. Not great, but good enough to move adequately around.


Last edited by BobbyClarkeFan16: 02-07-2012 at 08:50 PM.
BobbyClarkeFan16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 09:07 PM
  #60
ilovetheflyers8
Registered User
 
ilovetheflyers8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: D.C.
Country: French Guiana Independentist
Posts: 4,882
vCash: 500
Thanks for the insight BobbyClarkeFan.

ilovetheflyers8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 10:02 PM
  #61
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,422
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16 View Post
I know some people laugh at this, but I managed to snag a job as a part time scout for Central Scouting Bureau just under six years ago. One of the things that I can tell with regards to scouting players is that there are certain characteristics you look for in players to determine whether or not they'll be players at the NHL level. With regards to Eriksson, he fits every criteria you look for in a goaltender to play at the NHL level.
That's pretty cool. How did you get the job and what exactly did you do?

Quote:
First thing that everyone looks at is physical fitness level. Eriksson is probably one of the top five conditioned hockey players in Europe. Not goaltender, but hockey player in general. His physical fitness level is off the chart. He's incredibly strong, he's flexible and more important, he has a low body fat percentage and a very high lean mass percentage (in his draft year, his body fat percentage was 7% - it's around 4 to 5% right now).

Second thing everyone looks at with regards to goaltenders is their hand to eye co-ordination/reflexes. Once again, Eriksson ranked very high with regards to hand to eye co-ordination/reflexes. His glove hand was incredibly accurate and his sight is pratically impeccable.

Third thing you want from a goaltender is lateral movement. In terms of lateral movement, only one goaltender from Eriksson's draft year had better lateral movement and that was Jacob Markstrom. Eriksson ranked ahead of goalies like Chet Pickard, Thomas McCollum, Jake Allen, Tyler Beskorowany, Peter Delmas, Michael Hutchinson, Marco Cousineau, Brayden Holtby, Harri Sateri, etc.......

The next thing you want from a goaltender is their positional play. Do they square up well against the puck? How deep in their crease do they play? If they play a butterfly style, how quick are they to get back on their feet, etc.......What hurt Eriksson at the time was that he didn't square up well against the puck and he played too deep in his crease. That was attributed to the European game, but it's something that can be worked on.

The fifth thing scouts look at with regards to goaltenders is how well they handle the puck. Once again, Eriksson didn't fare so well in this category. He had improved by the time the draft rolled around, but he didn't improve significantly. That was one thing that he needed to work on and from video I've seen since his draft year, it has improved. He'll never be Martin Brodeur, but he has improved to the point where he's competent at handling the puck.

The one big intangible that couldn't be answered at the time, which also affected his draft rating, was how he handled adversity. Part of the problem was that Eriksson never faced any sort of adversity in his career. He always put up dominant numbers in every league he ever played in. Once again, scouts saw that as a negative. The other issue scouts had was that Eriksson had stated he wanted to remain in Sweden for two years after his draft year and then he wanted to come over to North America. He wasn't ready to come over after two years and scouts tried to tell him to stay in Sweden until he was 23/24. By then, he would have played in the SEL for at least a season or two and it could have been determined whether or not he was ready.

After his first season in the SEL, the Flyers didn't offer a contract. Part of it was because Neil Little felt that Eriksson wouldn't be able to rebound. He was never given the opportunity to rebound from the poor season. As well, Little became infatuated with Hovinen in Finland. Little saw a big goaltender who put up great numbers in the Finnish Elite League and was gushing over Hovinen's ability.

Now that Eriksson has had a year to get his game together at the SEL level, he's putting up numbers that were similar to Henrik Lundqvist (actually, in their 22nd year, Eriksson's numbers are better than Lundqvist's were at the same time).

I know hindsight is always 20/20, but Eriksson was what most would consider a definite player. At the very worst, you had a very good back up goaltender in the NHL and best case scenario is that he's going to be a number one. That's the kind of player you don't give up on after one poor season.

EDIT: One other reason why Eriksson went lower than others was simply due to the fact that his draft year, he played in only 28 games his draft year. The goaltenders who were drafted ahead of Eriksson played at least double the number of games he played. The other thing I should mention is that Eriksson is a good skating goaltender. Not great, but good enough to move adequately around.
That's all well and good and when they drafted him I don't think anyone was complaining. Certainly not me, anyway. But three years later when he isn't panning out and they don't decide to sign him, the scouting report from his draft year means bupkis. Especially considering he went through another draft and was undrafted and unsigned by an NHL team thereafter. Which again, I am not saying means the Flyers were right and this kid will not amount to anything, but if nothing else that fact at least lends credence to the notion that the Flyers did not make a mistake in this situation.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 10:12 PM
  #62
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,422
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
Nothing is ever a guarantee in this game.

But not putting the odds in your favor by signing him is ****ING stupid. I hope that answers your last question.
How would signing a guy you don't think is going to amount to anything putting the odds in your favor? If they thought he had all this potential, don't you think they would have signed him? And if they did think that and didn't sign him, then yes you are right, this was a bonehead move. But there is no indication that that is the case. Which is why I am wondering what people are upset about.

What information do you have that this organization and the 29 others that passed on him last year don't have that makes you think he is going to be worth it more than Hovinen (or any other player)? That is what I don't understand. If this was a guy you watched all the time and have experience with, then ok, explain to me why this is a bad move. But just because euroflyers tweeted about him and he is putting good numbers doesn't mean the kid is going to be anything special in the NHL.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 01:39 PM
  #63
BobbyClarkeFan16
Registered User
 
BobbyClarkeFan16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,895
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
That's pretty cool. How did you get the job and what exactly did you do?
At the time, my next door neighbours were scouts and I struck up a friendship. They thought it was funny that I knew draft years, players, picks, trades, teams, etc....and that I could quote who was drafted by where and all that. So, they ended up bringing me to a few games and when they saw that I had a good eye, they got me in touch with their bosses at the CSB and I was given a part time job as a scout. Usually, I go to games for free and give evaluations to certain teams when asked. I'll PM you a story one time about Jeff Skinner.



Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
That's all well and good and when they drafted him I don't think anyone was complaining. Certainly not me, anyway. But three years later when he isn't panning out and they don't decide to sign him, the scouting report from his draft year means bupkis. Especially considering he went through another draft and was undrafted and unsigned by an NHL team thereafter. Which again, I am not saying means the Flyers were right and this kid will not amount to anything, but if nothing else that fact at least lends credence to the notion that the Flyers did not make a mistake in this situation.
In all seriousness, Eriksson didn't get redrafted simply because he was a late round pick. No team was going to spend a pick on redrafting someone who was a late round pick already. Most teams figured he needed the second year with the SEL to really refine and get his game together. I'm willing to bet that this summer, there will be at least 9 or 10 teams lined up for Eriksson. He's going to be in total control of his destiny and that whoever signs him, they're getting a goalie who is ready to become an NHL goaltender. His work ethic is second to none and he's probably the most ready to make the jump to the NHL.

BobbyClarkeFan16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 02:56 PM
  #64
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,422
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16 View Post
At the time, my next door neighbours were scouts and I struck up a friendship. They thought it was funny that I knew draft years, players, picks, trades, teams, etc....and that I could quote who was drafted by where and all that. So, they ended up bringing me to a few games and when they saw that I had a good eye, they got me in touch with their bosses at the CSB and I was given a part time job as a scout. Usually, I go to games for free and give evaluations to certain teams when asked. I'll PM you a story one time about Jeff Skinner.
That's pretty sweet.

Quote:
In all seriousness, Eriksson didn't get redrafted simply because he was a late round pick. No team was going to spend a pick on redrafting someone who was a late round pick already. Most teams figured he needed the second year with the SEL to really refine and get his game together. I'm willing to bet that this summer, there will be at least 9 or 10 teams lined up for Eriksson. He's going to be in total control of his destiny and that whoever signs him, they're getting a goalie who is ready to become an NHL goaltender. His work ethic is second to none and he's probably the most ready to make the jump to the NHL.
That logic doesn't really make sense to me. If everyone thinks this guy is going to be good, and the Flyers are stupid for not re-signing him because everyone knows he is going to be good, then at least one team would have drafted or signed him. If that is the case, that everyone thinks this guy is going to be good but no one is drafting or signing him, then every organization is making a foolish and unfathomable mistake. There would be no reason to see a guy, think he has that potential, and not do something about it. If that is what the Flyers did, then ok they made a huge mistake. I just find it hard to believe that the Flyers (and 29 other teams) think this kid is going to be something special but no one wants him. Hence, I will defer to those people who have seen the kid play and are paid professionals (i.e. scouts of the organization who decided to pass on him) rather than thinking I know more because I have seen YouTube clips and read some blogs about him.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 04:33 PM
  #65
BobbyClarkeFan16
Registered User
 
BobbyClarkeFan16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,895
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
That's pretty sweet.



That logic doesn't really make sense to me. If everyone thinks this guy is going to be good, and the Flyers are stupid for not re-signing him because everyone knows he is going to be good, then at least one team would have drafted or signed him. If that is the case, that everyone thinks this guy is going to be good but no one is drafting or signing him, then every organization is making a foolish and unfathomable mistake. There would be no reason to see a guy, think he has that potential, and not do something about it. If that is what the Flyers did, then ok they made a huge mistake. I just find it hard to believe that the Flyers (and 29 other teams) think this kid is going to be something special but no one wants him. Hence, I will defer to those people who have seen the kid play and are paid professionals (i.e. scouts of the organization who decided to pass on him) rather than thinking I know more because I have seen YouTube clips and read some blogs about him.
Fair enough. The other appeal about signing Eriksson now is that it's only a two year deal that's required with regards to an ELC. That's something appealing for most teams. I don't know why, but a lot of teams don't like the 3 year ELC with European players.

BobbyClarkeFan16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 05:35 PM
  #66
Amateur Hour
Registered User
 
Amateur Hour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Negadelphia
Posts: 6,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16 View Post
Fair enough. The other appeal about signing Eriksson now is that it's only a two year deal that's required with regards to an ELC. That's something appealing for most teams. I don't know why, but a lot of teams don't like the 3 year ELC with European players.
I'm dreading 2-3 years down the road when Eriksson is a burgeoning #1 goalie in this league for another team and Bryz is still ******** the bed while his contract cripples the Flyers' salary cap structure. I can just see it now.

Amateur Hour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 09:46 PM
  #67
BobbyClarkeFan16
Registered User
 
BobbyClarkeFan16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,895
vCash: 500
Well, I'm not worried about Bryzgalov. I know he'll rebound. He's having a bad season because he put on too much muscle and weight after signing his deal with the Flyers. He's gassed because he's too heavy. I suspect that when Bryzgalov comes into camp next year, he'll have trimmed up and be in the 190 to 195 range.

I'm almost certain that someone from within the organization told him to add some weight. Biggest mistake they ever made. Why do you think the Flyers aren't getting rid of Bryzgalov and are protecting him? Someone in the organization screwed up and told him that he needed to add more muscle and now that Bryz added it, it's backfired on the club. This is just a cover your a$$ exercise at it's finest.

BobbyClarkeFan16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 09:59 PM
  #68
BringBackStevens
Registered User
 
BringBackStevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 12,027
vCash: 500
What was there really to lose by signing a guy like eriksson? Just dumb to not do so

BringBackStevens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 11:00 PM
  #69
Vikke
FHM 13 researcher
 
Vikke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bustoville
Country: Sweden
Posts: 12,937
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BringBackStevens View Post
What was there really to lose by signing a guy like eriksson? Just dumb to not do so
Max 50 contracts and the organization felt Hovinen was a better choice.
I don't necessarily disagree because I've never seen Hovinen, but I was very much against letting Ericsson go this summer and I still am. I believe he's got what it takes to be a pretty solid NHL goalie.

Vikke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 11:22 PM
  #70
Amateur Hour
Registered User
 
Amateur Hour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Negadelphia
Posts: 6,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vikke View Post
Max 50 contracts and the organization felt Hovinen was a better choice.
I don't necessarily disagree because I've never seen Hovinen, but I was very much against letting Ericsson go this summer and I still am. I believe he's got what it takes to be a pretty solid NHL goalie.
I wonder if the Flyers are interested in signing Eriksson again, and if he would even be open to the idea of rejoining the organization. I imagine he'll be coming over to the States for next season, right? Eriksson and Hovinen could duke it out for the starting spot on the Phantoms. Who knows, maybe Bob could be traded, which would open up two spots -- one as the backup to Bryz, and the other as the #1 for Adirondack.

Amateur Hour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 11:36 PM
  #71
Amateur Hour
Registered User
 
Amateur Hour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Negadelphia
Posts: 6,507
vCash: 500
I really shouldn't have looked at the list of the Flyers' 50 contracts. Yeah, hindsight's 20/20 (especially given Eriksson's lackluster 2010-2011 season), but it still made me really mad. Come on, Homer, you couldn't have kept Eriksson -- even though he was staying overseas for another year -- instead of, say, Dan freakin' Jancevski? Or how about Joonas Lehtivuori (who obviously wasn't in the team's future plans)?

Amateur Hour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 12:57 AM
  #72
GoneFullHextall
adios Holmgren
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 31,080
vCash: 50
well we should(at least I hope) have a couple of openings in goal down in Adirondack. Maybe we take another shot at the guy and convince him to come over and give it a shot. A duo of Hovinen and Eriksson would be pretty good. At least make an attempt to develop a goalie by starting him in the AHL. I really dont want to go down the having 2 AHL veteran bums in goal for the Phantoms.

GoneFullHextall 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 07:35 PM.

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.