Never heard anyone in the org give much more than a lukewarm endorsement of Ranford, and they never mention his name when you ask whom they consider their best prospects (Cousins' name, conversely, came up quickly).
If they were high on Ranford's NHL potential, he would have already been signed. Think about it: This organization rarely goes deep into year two on CHL players they intend to sign to an entry-level contract and never on players for whom they hold high hopes of being part of their NHL players.
IMO, as soon as you started hearing question marks about his conditioning and attitude toward coaches, that pretty much was strike three after initial questions about his size, skating, and two-way play. These may have improved at the junior level this season but the pro game is a different story and it's hard for players to erase the negative perceptions once they take hold.
I could be wrong, and the Flyers could sign him yet, but I'm not expecting it.
The first thing that popped into my head was honestly how much of this "three strike" thought process, even if it wasn't so organized or contrived as to declare a "strike" scenario, went into the departure of Eriksson from the organization.
Back to Ranford, I'm not so sure that the organization letting him walk is a great idea. I'm a firm believer in using your assets until you're sure there is nothing there. It's why I have been so outspoken about Eriksson, and while I think Eriksson may have been a bigger blunder than the possible departure of Ranford, I can't really approve of either move.
Ranford did have the three strikes under him already: size, skating, and defensive play. However, he plays bigger than his actual size, and in the meanwhile, his skating and defensive game has improved.
The more that I think about though, despite how much I dislike it, I think you may be right. I have a different theory as to why though. I don't think the drama in Kamloops was Ranford's fault, even though the Flyers' organization might not care. I also don't think it's simply "he didn't produce/grow enough during juniors."
I really think you're starting to see the organization target guys specifically for Laviolette's system. Those are the guys getting contracts and getting pushed through.
With Ranford's skating, as much as he bettered himself, he was still going to lag behind this system at the NHL level in a noticeable way.
Maybe it isn't that simple, but I still want to see him signed. Losing assets for nothing is poor asset management.
The first thing that popped into my head was honestly how much of this "three strike" thought process, even if it wasn't so organized or contrived as to declare a "strike" scenario, went into the departure of Eriksson from the organization.
Back to Ranford, I'm not so sure that the organization letting him walk is a great idea. I'm a firm believer in using your assets until you're sure there is nothing there. It's why I have been so outspoken about Eriksson, and while I think Eriksson may have been a bigger blunder than the possible departure of Ranford, I can't really approve of either move.
Ranford did have the three strikes under him already: size, skating, and defensive play. However, he plays bigger than his actual size, and in the meanwhile, his skating and defensive game has improved.
The more that I think about though, despite how much I dislike it, I think you may be right. I have a different theory as to why though. I don't think the drama in Kamloops was Ranford's fault, even though the Flyers' organization might not care. I also don't think it's simply "he didn't produce/grow enough during juniors."
I really think you're starting to see the organization target guys specifically for Laviolette's system. Those are the guys getting contracts and getting pushed through.
With Ranford's skating, as much as he bettered himself, he was still going to lag behind this system at the NHL level in a noticeable way.
Maybe it isn't that simple, but I still want to see him signed. Losing assets for nothing is poor asset management.
yeah, but if we take that contract and nab another matt read I'll be very happy..
Homer has been pretty phenomenal at picking guys out of no where...neither of these are huge losses, BUT they could be huge pickups!
Very well indeed. My little guy turns 4 on Monday. Hard to believe. Ain't life as a dad great?
I got a 5 year old and two 3 year old boys. All they do is watch Flyer hockey with me, play hockey in the basement, the oldest plays ice hockey, outside we play hockey in the street, at times we play hockey on the PS3, all three collect hockey cards. AWESOME
I got a 5 year old and two 3 year old boys. All they do is watch Flyer hockey with me, play hockey in the basement, the oldest plays ice hockey, outside we play hockey in the street, at times we play hockey on the PS3, all three collect hockey cards. AWESOME
When I have kids, they will do exactly what yours are doing. I hope anyway!
I think we should sign Blidstrand though, if Phantoms signed Elynuik, Blidstrand should be a better shot, he changed his style to be more defensive and he did very well before he was traded to PG.
I think we should sign Blidstrand though, if Phantoms signed Elynuik, Blidstrand should be a better shot, he changed his style to be more defensive and he did very well before he was traded to PG.
We just signed Konan who outperformed Blidstrand on every level.
What is Cousins' upside? He seems like a Brad Marchand type. Although he seems to be tougher than Marchand. What's his future going to be like with this team?
What is Cousins' upside? He seems like a Brad Marchand type. Although he seems to be tougher than Marchand. What's his future going to be like with this team?
That's a good comparison. He's a 2/3rd line heart and soul guy with a fair bit of offensive talent. Definitely a pest. A slightly less physical version of Steve Downie is the next most reasonable comparison.
Cousins has played in only 1 game so far (3/31). Nothing on the score sheet as yet. Not sure why he didn't play last night or today.
Mangene played last night (2 shots) and today (nothing).
Maybe it isn't that simple, but I still want to see him signed. Losing assets for nothing is poor asset management.
Isn't this the thing many of us have been saying for the last few years after Homer took over? Waiving players to remove contracts, trading picks as throw in for deals (many times to cover up terrible contracts we offered them), terrible long term contracts that became too expensive (possibly due to bidding against himself), releasing many prospects like Eriksson, and "forgetting" about players you want to draft. He's made some good deals, but it's the actual asset management that gets me.
So Cousins is good at both ends of the ice I take it right? Whose wing will he be playing on Schenn's? Couts'? I'm sure he'll see no time as a center. In 3 years, we could look like this:
I really like the looks of that. Skill, speed, and lots of grit. Not to mention almost every forward is defensively responsible. Imagine if JVR actually develops into the 30 goal scorer. Fourth line might need a little more size, but that's it.
Fourth line might need a little more size, but that's it.
